9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 576X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eque issued by one Shri Archit Shah was to the tune of Rs.13,50,000/- against the debit balance of Rs.12,14,072/- , difference was added by AO as the income of the assessee derived by way of interest on their loan advances – Held that:- department could not bring on record any material to show that the assessee actually received interest of Rs.1,35,928/- at any point of time – Against the revenue. Addition on the basis of entries mentioned in the seized documents – AO observed that on the seized paper, two amount respectively Rs.30 lacs and Rs.11 lacs were indicated, and on this basis additions were made – Held that:- addition was made only on the basis of the noting on the piece of papers without there being any evidence – It is complet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ering that these were the cash advances given by respondent to Shri Rakesh Patel on the security of the cheques, explanation of the respondent was sought. The written submission of respondent came out with the explanation that one Shri Archit Shah since could not pay up their dues whose cheques were bounded. He proceeded against Shri Archit Shah u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and Mr.Shah therefore, brought in Mr.Rakesh Patel as guarantor. Therefore, three cheques and hundis were lying with him. Thereafter also when Mr.Archit Shah could not make payment and, therefore, one of the three cheques was sent for clearing by an intermediary Jagruti Trading Company in whose custody the cheques and hundies were kept by Mr.Rakesh Patel. Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(Appeals) was of the opinion that such addition could not have been considered in block assessment and in fact respondent had not charged any interest as the recovery of principal amount itself was doubtful which was completely written off by the respondent. Tribunal upholding the version of the CIT(Appeals) held thus : 14.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the order of the lower authorities and the materials available on record. The Learned Assessing Officer observed that assessee has received a cheque of Rs.13,50,000/- from Shri Archit K.Shah which was bounced from the bank and the assessee has filed criminal petition against the said Archit K.Shah. The Learned Assessing Officer further observed that the amount due f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is warranted. We therefore, confirm the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismiss this ground of appeal of revenue 9. No infirmity or illegality could be pointed out by the Revenue which in these findings are purely factual in nature. Tribunal being the facts finding body , with no perversity such conclusion, the issue requires no indulgence. 10. Third issue raised is the addition of Rs.41 lakhs being entries mentioned in the seized documents. Assessing Officer observed that on the seized paper, two amount respectively Rs.30 lacs and Rs.11 lacs were indicated with corresponding dates on 20.10.2000 and 14.10.2000. Explanation given by respondent was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
