9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und that the first appellate authority was not justified in deleting the additions on account of unexplained cash credits. 2. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee had introduced capital of Rs. 2,80,000 from Shri Pankaj Kumar Chesh, a new partner. Further capitals of Rs. 3 lakhs were introduced from three existing partners of Rs.1 lakh each. The Assessing Officer disbelieved the cap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er was introduced in his place who had given Rs.2,80,000 to the firm. The other three existing partners had given Rs. 1 lakh each to the firm. All the partners are Income-tax assessees and they duly proved the sources of the funds before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, there was no occasion to make the addition. Reliance was placed on the decisions in CIT v. Jaiswal Motor Finance [1983] 141 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... explained as to how the funds were generated for giving to the firm. Now, it is a question of disbelieving the sources of the partners. However, even if the sources of the partners are disbelieved, in such circumstances, no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee firm because the firm had already explained that the money came from the partners and it is not a case that the firm s money ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
