9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 776X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty and status of the depositors - No effort was made by the assessee to discharge the burden statutorily placed on it in that regard - While deleting the addition, only ground which the CIT(A) has mentioned is that the deposits were as per Section 58A of the Companies Act, which could not be conclusive - The Tribunal also failed to appreciate the patent error in the view taken by the CIT(A) - Hence, answered in favour of the revenue. - I.T.A. No.131 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 7-12-2010 - MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ. Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Standing Counsel for the appellant. Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate for the respondent. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cured loans of Rs.2,09,37,000/- (2,12,00,000 minus 2,63,000/-. The depositors as per list filed and placed on records are not assessed to Income tax and the assessee company also could not prove their identification, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction. Under these circumstances, a sum of Rs.2,09,37,000/- is treated the assessee s income earned from undisclosed sources and is added in the income of the assessee. 3. On appeal of the assessee, the CIT(A) deleted the addition with the following observations:- 13. Ground No.4 is regarding aggregate addition of Rs.2,09,37,000/- being the amount of public deposit accepted u/s 58A of the Companies Act. I agree with the submissions of the Ld. Counsel quoted above that all the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty, creditworthiness of the creditor and the genuineness. However, the abovesaid conventional parameters have to (?) forms whereby it had received deposits for Rs.2,63,000/- which have been accepted as explained. The fact that the Assessing Officer was satisfied about the nature and source of the credit on the basis of the application forms in the case of three creditors itself shows an inconsistency in his approach. If according to him, the vetting of the application form was enough to discharge the onus cast on the assessee under sec.68 of the Act, he ought not to have made any addition. It is starkly evident that if the Assessing Officer was satisfied that the assessee had discharged the onus cast under section 68 on the basis of the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he part of the CIT(Appeals) in concluding the issue, nevertheless the CIT(Appeals) has, in extensor referred to the submissions of the assessee as also the remand report of the Assessing Officer in this regard. Therefore, merely because the order of the CIT(Appeals) in brief, cannot be a reason to interpret it as a non-speaking order... 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that in absence of satisfactory explanation, the Assessing Officer was justified in treating the amount of cash deposits as income of the assessee and the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal erred in holding that the assessee had given sufficient explanation only on account of the fact that the deposits had bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that regard. No doubt, the assessee furnished the list of depositors with their addresses but mere furnishing of the said material was not enough to discharge the burden. The assessee could have produced documents taken from the depositors at the time deposit, which could establish their identity and status and also inspire confidence about the genuineness of the depositors. This having not been done, as held by the Assessing Officer, the CIT (A) could either give further opportunity or drawn adverse inference against the assessee for withholding material available with it. While deleting the addition, only ground which the CIT(A) has mentioned is that the deposits were as per Section 58A of the Companies Act, which in our view could not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
