9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (6) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd draft from Indian Bank of Alwar on 27th June, 1980 worth Rs. 3 lakhs out of unaccounted money. It was enquired from the Bank Manager and he also confirmed that four demand drafts of Rs. 46,330, Rs. 50,000 Rs. 50,000 and Rs. 76,500 were purchased by Shri Radhey Shyam in favour of Mahendra Kumar Rs. 46,300, in favour of Shri Radhey Shyam Rs. 50,000 and in favour of Shri Thakur Das Rs. 76,500 on 27th June, 1980. Statements of Svs. Radhey Shyam, Thakurdas Satya Narain and Chandrabhan Poddar were recorded by the Asst. Director of Inspection (ADI) as well as in some cases by the ITO also. On the basis of statements, the ITO found that the assessee could not explain the source of amount worth Rs. 1,60,000 stated to have been taken from Shri Pod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddar, Rs. 10,000 from Shri Laxmi Narain, Rs. 1,20,000 from M/s Bhagwan Rolling Mills through Shri Satya Narain. So far the loan from Shri Chandrabhan is concerned, he categorically denied having advanced any loan to the assessee. There was no satisfactory explanation by Shri Laxmi Narain also. Similarly, Shri Satya Narain who is a relation of assessee Shri Thakurdas, denied having advanced any money to the assessee. Shri Chandrabhan Poddar and Shri Satya Narain have accepted before the IT authorities in their statements that there was no genuine loan from these persons but only an accommodation was given by the assessee, being the relative of these persons. Therefore, the addition made by the ITO as income from undisclosed sources was justi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the assessee had discharged its burden by proving the genuineness of loan and in case of Bhagwan Rolling Mills, though the loan was taken in cash, it was returned by the demand draft. Therefore, mere subsequent denial of Shri Poddar and Shri Satya Narain is not very material. The CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition. He further submitted that the statements taken behind the back of the assessee should not be utilised as evidence against the assessee. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and considered the material on record. The facts stated above are not in dispute that the Demand Draft was issued from the Indian Bank at Alwar and the money was arranged by the assessee. The part of that amount i.e. Rs. 1,60,000 was stated to have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... according to the above said statement. Only I had been got received upon that. This receipt was done by me under pressure of relationship and it was totally wrong. I clearly state that whatever was written in that pronote neither likewise I had given money to Shri Thakurdas, Alwarwala on 26th June, 1980 or Shri Radhey Shyamji Alwarwala, nor any amount was received back by me either on 20-21 July or after 25th June, 1980 till date. The said pronote is false." Though subsequently, he admitted again that he has given advance to Shri Thakur Das, assessee, but still we feel that once he had given the loan to Shri Thakur Das there was no apparent reason why he denied having advanced any money to Shri Thakur Das. Again because of the pressure f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterest was paid by the assessee i.e. Rs. 1,464 on 31st July, 1980. The loan was repaid by Demand Draft No. 016745 dt. 31st Jan., 1980. Shri Satya Narain is related to the assessee and in his statement on 12th Aug., 1980, which was recorded upto 16th Aug., 1980, in the beginning Shri Satya Narain had admitted before the ADI that he had advanced loan of Rs. 1,20,000 per cent interest of 1.20 p.m. The books were not produced before the ADI till 14th Aug., 1980. The same was produced on 16th Aug., 1980. He reversed his earlier statement and said that the statement which was given on 12th Aug., 1980 was not correct. He only gave an Hawala accommodation to Shri Thakur Das, assessee. Even the Pronote was executed on 31st Aug., 1980. The money was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raft No. 016745 dated 31st March, 1980, which is not denied. In our view, when the loan was taken, the pronote was executed and re-payment of loan was by a Demand Draft to Shri Satya Narain as partner of M/s Bhagwan Rolling Mills is enough to show that the assessee has taken the loan from Shri Satya Narain. If Shri Satya Narain has not properly accounted for it in the books of Bhagwan Rolling Mills, or if Shri Satyanarain has given this loan out of his own money, for that the assessee should not be penalised. There is no sufficient or cogent evidence that the demand draft was only an eyewash and Shri Thakur Das has taken back the money in cash. We are not satisfied with the statement of Shri Satya Narain. Accordingly, on the basis of materi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
