9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 889X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is accordingly dismissed. - IT APPEAL No. 461 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 28-9-2010 - Adarsh Kumar Goel and Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. K.L. Goyal and Sandeep Goyal for the Appellant. ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal, J . This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 30.10.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in ITA No. 351(ASR)/2009 for the assessment year 2006-07 proposing following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Tribunal was justified in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,74,140/- on account of unsecured loan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew unsecured loan from his wife, Smt. Rosy Chhabra, as under: - Rs. 53,145/- on 16.03.2006 Rs.20,000/-on 17.03.2006 The copy of bank account of Smt. Rosy Chhabra revealed that these amounts were advanced out of a credit entry of Rs. 73,170/- in her bank account on 13.03.2006. Further enquiries about the source of Rs.73,170/- revealed that this amount was allegedly received by her from some commodity transactions through M/s S.P. Scripts Ltd. Ludhiana. The detail of the alleged transactions through M/s S.P. Scripts, Ludhiana has been noticed as under:- Name of the commodity Date of purchase shown Amount of purchase shown Date of sale shown Amount of sale shown Profit shown ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,02,745/- 4.2 The statement of Smt, Rosy Chhabra was recorded in this office and it was stated, inter alia , by her as under:- "I do not know the person who is running the brokerage agency. I do not give any advance to that person. I do not know about the commission paid to the brokerage agency. I have seen the relevant copies of papers showing the purchase sale of commodities and find that there is no entry of commission on these papers. The transaction with the brokerage agency was through some common friend of my husband at Ludhiana. No delivery was taken. The common friend of my husband was the surety with the brokerage agency. During the next financial year also, the transaction of comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they do not know the name of the brokerage agency. As is well known, every person doing the brokerage business of such type involving heavy transactions would not take the risk without adequate security amount. Both the persons have also admitted their ignorance about the commission charged by the broker. It is also interesting to note that the assessee furnished affidavits from both the persons suo motu on the last day of the hearing wherein it was found to have been stated that the broker company charged brokerage which was included in the purchase price. It is thus clear that the purpose of furnishing affidavits by the assessee is an attempt to fortify his case, otherwise how it could happen that these persons could not tell about the is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in Gem Palace v. CIT [1987] 168 ITR 543/31 Taxman 381 (Raj.) and Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT [2003] 264 ITR 254/[2004] 136 Taxman 213 (Guj.) 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the assessee and do not find any merit in the same. 8. The Assessing Officer, the CIT (A) and the Tribunal have concurrently arrived at the conclusion that two cash credits allegedly advanced by Rosy Chhabra wife of the assessee amounting to Rs. 73,145/- and Sanjit Kumar cousin of the assesses in respect of Rs, 1,00,000/- and the interest paid by the assesses thereon of Rs.460/- and Rs.535/- respectively were unexplained cash credit which were added under Section 68 of the Act. Only effor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
