2012 (8) TMI 632

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... laimed by the assessee from 3 other persons for want of convincing evidence - assessee's appeal against the second rectification order was allowed by the CIT (Appeals), which was reversed by the Tribunal on Departmental appeal - claims were rejected because the assessee could not substantiate his claim of debt due to the 3 parties, which is a new claim made in second rectification after completion .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... k assessment by treating accretion to net wealth during the block period as income. It is seen that the Assessing Officer while making assessment accepted assessee's claim of debt worth Rs. 82,80,483/ comprising of credit availed from 4 persons which is over and above specific credits allowed. The assessee filed rectification application claiming a further deduction of Rs. 23,20,000/- as payable t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the CIT (Appeals), which was reversed by the Tribunal on Departmental appeal. 4. So much so, the question is whether there is convincing evidence with regard to the 3 items of loan additionally claimed by the assessee in rectification proceedings. The Tribunal after verifying the records and evidence found no basis in the claim. We are of the view that the claims were rejected because the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X