9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the following grounds of appeal:- "1. The learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 50,51,650 made by the AO under s. 68 on account of unexplained income/cash credits. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts of the case in admitting fresh/additional evidence regarding cash credits and accepting the same ignoring the fact that during assessment proceedings the assessee has already been given various opportunity to explain his case. 3. The learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts of the case in admitting fresh/additional evidence regarding cash credits and accepting the same without giving an opportunity of cross-examination to the AO." 3. The issue raised in the present appeal is against the deletion of addition made under s. 68 of the IT Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 50,51,650. The grievance of the Revenue is against the admission of fresh/additional evidence regarding the cash credits, without giving an opportunity of cross-examination to the AO. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessment in the case was completed ex parte under s. 144 of the Act as despite several notices ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as advanced to the assessee company, which in turn is reflected in the bank account of the assessee company. The copies of the aforesaid bank accounts were also filed. The CIT(A) observed that the written submissions of the learned counsel as above along with copies of additional evidence, whatsoever, sought to be admitted by the learned counsel were forwarded to the AO. The AO (Asstt. CIT, CC, Chandigarh) sent his report under letter No. CC/Asstt. CIT/2006-07/1082, dt. 20th Feb., 2007. As per this report of the AO, it is a fact that no notice or any questionnaire could be served directly upon the appellant since nobody was there at the last known address. In this report, the AO has further stated that from the evidence filed by the appellant in the shape of passport of Smt. Pritpal Kaur showing that she had left for USA, and further evidence relating to her medical treatment in USA and also other relevant information, it appears that Smt. Pritpal Kaur was not in India when the case was taken up for hearing. The AO further reported that it appeared that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in not filing any information before him. However, he further mentioned in this re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e balance sheet in as much as when he asked the management that who had sent the money, the name was given as Shri Reetinder Sidhu without realizing the fact that there is a documentary evidence of the amounts having come to the mother of Shri Reetinder Sidhu and from the savings fund account of the mother, the amount had been advanced to the company. 8. Further, evidence was furnished by the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee that the amounts received in the savings account of Smt. Pritpal Kaur was in turn received from her son were invested in FDRs and later on out of encashment of the FDRs received the amounts were advanced to the company. It was also explained that the amounts received from Smt. Pritpal Kaur was later on returned back to his son after her death. It was claimed that the assessee having received the amounts from the director stands explained and even the source of source has been explained. The confirmation of Smt. Pritpal Kaur along with the source from where the amounts were advanced were furnished before the CIT(A). 9. The CIT(A) on consideration of the records, admitting the additional evidence further observed as under:- "The lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... However, it is amply clarified in the written submissions of the learned counsel and the evidence brought on record under r. 46A of the IT Rules, 1962 by him that Shri Reetinder Sidhu has been residing in USA for the last 20 years or so. He is the son of Smt. Pritpai Kaur. Shri Reetinder Sidhu had been sending different amounts to his mother, Smt. Pritpai Kaur in various years. This is quite evident from the entries in the bank pass book of Smt. Pritpai Kaur and other documents filed. Shri Reetinder Sidhu is shown to be carrying on business in USA and he is stated to have opened even an outlet namely "Pizza Hut" and also carrying on his independent business. Therefore, the identity of Shri Reetinder Sidhu, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel, is beyond any doubt. From the vary fact that he had been carrying on business in USA for the last 20 years, his capacity is also proved. The evidence filed in the shape of copies of cheques and bank drafts and copy of bank account of Smt. Pritpal Kaur further confirms without any doubt that it was the money sent by Shri Reetinder Sidhu from USA which was deposited in the bank account of Smt. Pritpal Kuar. Though the amounts having b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk account of Smt. Pritpal Kaur. The copies of such evidence are placed at pp. 6 to 14 of the paper book. The learned Authorised Representative thus pointed out that once the sources are explained in the hands of the assessee company there is no merit in any addition under s. 68 of the IT Act, 1961. 14. We find that the CIT(A) has elaborately looked into the evidence filed by the assessee, which was admitted and taken on record pursuant to the remand report of the AO. The said amount though has been reflected as received from Shri Reetinder Sidhu in the balance sheet of the assessee was in fact transferred from the bank account of Smt. Pritpal Kaur, one of the directors of the assessee company. She in turn had received the said amount from her son vide cheques/drafts issued abroad, which were deposited in her bank account and FDRs were made in the first instances from the said amounts received. Later the said FDRs were encashed and the amount deposited in the savings account of Smt. Pritpal Kaur with Punjab and Sind Bank, from where the cheques then issued to the assessee company. 15. The amount has by an error been shown to have been received from Shri Reetinder Sidhu. as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
