9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... money to Sri Wazir Ahmad. In respect of the deposit of Sri Jamal Ahmad, he did not appear before the A.O. in spite of summon having been sent and the appellant also did not take any steps to produce him, thus the identity and source of the deposit of Jamal Ahmad remain unproved. Therefore, the two deposits have rightly been added u/s 68 – Decided against the assessee. - IT APPEAL NO. 22 OF 2003 - - - Dated:- 1-12-2011 - R.K. AGRAWAL AND B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JJ. Shakeel Ahmad for the Petitioner. A.N. Mahajan for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The present appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act 1961 (herein after referred to as the Act.) against the order dated 29.07.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by Sri Nazeer Ahmad and Rs. 15,000/- made by Sri Jamal Ahmad, the Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that so far as Sri Nazeer Ahmad is concerned, the appellant has failed to establish that he had the capacity to make deposit of Rs. 88,000/-. In respect of deposit of Rs. 15,000/- made by Sri Jamal Ahmad for the reasons best known the said creditor did not appear before the Assessing Officer in spite of summon having been sent on the address given by the appellant nor the appellant took care to produce him before the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the two deposits of Rs. 88,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- totalling Rs. 1,03,000/- was added as income from unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The appeal preferred by the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as raised by learned counsel for the parties, in our considered opinion under Section 68 of the Act, the appellant has to prove the nature and source of the deposit. In the present case, even though Sri Wazir Ahmad had appeared before the Assessing Officer, the identity of the creditor having been established, yet the appellant had failed to prove the source of the deposit made by Sri Wazir Ahmad as his capacity to advance of Rs. 88,000/-could not be established. Mere explanation of Sri Wazir Ahmad that he had borrowed the money from his close relatives, would not be sufficient without there being any further proof of the identity of the persons who had lent the money to Sri Wazir Ahmad. If the particulars of such persons were disclosed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
