2010 (8) TMI 59

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ooked into or considered. The aforesaid evidence clinches the issue in favour of the assessee, who had duly explained the cash received in the accounts of Mrs. Yojana Garg and Mr. Rajiv Garg from where the payments were made - decided in favor of assessee
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Advocate Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate A.K. SIKRI, J. (Oral) 1. Admit. 2. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration: "Whether the order of the learned Tribunal as well as Authorities below suffers from a fundamental error and illegality in adding ₹ 2,26,592 as unexplained cash credits to the assessment of the appellant, when the amount was paid by cheque fro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Yojana Garg and Mr. Rajiv Garg on behalf of the appellant. The Assessing Officer, however, came to the conclusion that the aforesaid two persons could not show their creditworthiness and therefore, made additions of ₹ 2,26,592 as unexplained cash credit. Certain other additions were also made, which included unexplained income of ₹ 37,550 and capital gain to the extent of ₹ 35,000. 5. Some of these additions were deleted by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('the Tribunal 'in short). However, three additions, viz., unexplained cash, credit of ₹ 2,26,592, unexplained income of ₹ 37,550 and capital gain of ₹ 35,000 have been sustained by the Tribunal. 6. This appeal is preferred challenging the order of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y the aforesaid persons. The highest amount which is gifted by his father is ₹ 1,00,000. The Bank Statements submitted by Bhan Prakash Garg shows the withdrawal of ₹ 1,00,000 (₹ 50,000 each) on the same date from his bank account. 10. We are, thus, of the opinion that findings of the Tribunal are totally perverse as the cogent and supportive evidence is not looked into or considered. The aforesaid evidence clinches the issue in favour of the assessee, who had duly explained the cash received in the accounts of Mrs. Yojana Garg and Mr. Rajiv Garg from where the payments were made. We, thus, decide the question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and delete the addition of ₹ 2,2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X