9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee in relation to the trade deposit were false." 3. The brief facts of this case are that return of income was filed on 30th Oct., 1995 and the assessment was completed under s. 143(3) on 11th March, 1998 after making various additions discussed in the order. The learned CIT(A) vide his order dt. 2nd Nov., 1998 restored the matter back to the AO with the following directions: "(i) Regarding the loan of Rs. 2 lakhs from M/s Mathevan Sons, the AO is directed to verify whether or not, the confirmation letter was filed before her and even otherwise, the present confirmation letter may be examined afresh. (ii) Regarding the addition on account of Rs. 6 lakhs from M/s Magadh Medicos, it has been directed by the learned CIT(A) that this addition requires afresh consideration on the part of the AO and various contentions made by the assessee require further investigation. So the matter is restored back to the AO. As such AO was directed to verify the confirmation letter and other contentions made by the issue in respect of trade deposits aggregating to Rs. 8 lakhs from Magadh Medicos and Mathevan Sons and decide the matter afresh." 4. Regarding loan of Rs. 2 lakhs from M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,00,000 on 14-9-1993 ------------ Rs. 4,00,000 ------------ So the above period relates to asst. yr. 1994-95. However, same transferred on 18th July, 2004 to the account of M/s Magadh Medicos. As such, during the current year M/s Magadh Medicos is the creditor shown in the books of M/s Jawa Laboratories. The above facts emerge from the evidence collected by the Departmental authorities and the statement of prop. of M/s Medicana Medical Agency who is brother of Late Shri Ramesh Prasad proprietor of M/s Magadh Medicos. It is very clear from above facts that assessee has not been able to discharge the onus on her to prove the identity, capacity and genuineness of the transactions regarding credit entry of Rs. 4 lakhs. Moreover, proprietor of M/s Medicana Medical Agency has specifically denied having made any transaction with M/s Jawa Laboratories. Further, as regards the deposits from M/s Magadh amounting to Rs. 2 lakhs during the financial year 1994-95, it has been claimed by the assessee that Jai Prakash is proprietor of the said concern as per the confirmation letter filed while the enquiries revealed that this person was only staff member of M/s Magadh Medicos and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... N of Mr. Ramesh was claimed to be PAN of Mr. Jai Prakash vide letter of the assessee dt. 30th Sept., 2000. The assessee has given wrong information throughout and, therefore, the assessee could not prove the genuineness of the deposit and the identity or the capacity of the depositor. In such circumstances, the deposit of the assessee of Rs. 2 lakhs along with interest of Rs. 79,890 has rightly been treated as income of the assessee under s. 68 of the Act by the AO. Therefore, we confirm the action of the AO and reverse the decision of the learned CIT(A). Hence, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed. ITA No. 207/Jp/2003-Revenue 9. In this appeal, the Revenue raised the following grounds: "(1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the Expln. 1 given under the proviso to s. 147, the learned CIT(A)-II, Jaipur, has erred in holding that the notice under s. 148 issued on 28th March, 2001 for the asst. yr. 1994-95 was barred by limitation within the meaning of proviso to s. 147, despite the fact that while framing the. original assessment order the AO had not made any enquiry to ascertain the genuineness of the trade deposit of Rs. 4 lakhs declared in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 147 of the Act and notice under s. 148 if so warranted could have been issued on or before 31st March, 1999 and in view of this the learned CIT(A) annulled the assessment made by the AO on 26th March, 2002. 12. The learned Departmental Representative argued that: "(1) In the appeal for asst. yr. 1994-95 Department has objected the annulment of assessment order under s. 147 by CIT(A) holding that it was time-barred. (2) Notice under s. 148 issued on 28th March, 2001 for asst. yr. 1994-95. (3) The AO during the course of assessment proceedings for asst. yr. 1995-96 conducted enquiries and reached the conclusion that there were reasons to believe that income to the extent of Rs. 4,28,110 has escaped assessment for asst. yr. 1994-95, hence notice under s. 148 was issued. (4) Sec, 149(1)(b) provides the time-limit in this case for issuance of notice under s. 148. If the escapement of income is or likely to be Rs. one lakh or more, then notice under s. 148 can be issued upto six years from the end of relevant assessment year. Hence notice under s. 148 issued for 1994-95 was well within time. (5) In this case during the original assessment for asst. yr. 1994-95 the AO had not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
