9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 311X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e A.O. observed that during the course of assessment proceeding, there was a credit of Rs.20,00,000/- in the capital account of the assessee through saving banck account of the assessee. The appellant had deposited four cheques each of Rs. 5,00,000/-, totaling to Rs. 20,00,000/- in capital account of the appellant, which were claimed to be received from Tanishq Hotel Limited. Further, the appellant deposited cash of Rs.2,30,000/- in his capital account. The ld. A.O. gave the reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to prove the source of this cash with evidence. The appellant replied vide letter dated 29.12.2009 that the credit entry in the capital account was actually refund of money which was deposited in F.Y. 2004-05 & 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dditional CIT vide letter dated 06.05.2010 which has been reproduced by the CIT(A) from page no. 26 to page no.29 in his order. The CIT(A) by considering the merit of the case had admitted the additional evidence filed in form of letter from Central Bank of India and Bavla Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd. The appellant advanced to Tanishq Hotel Limited at Rs.22.5 lacs as under:- (i) Rs. 5,00,000/- on 05.04.2004 by cheque, details given in the bank account filed before A.O. (ii) Rs. 10,00,000/- on 27.10.2005 by cheque, details given in the bank account filed before A.O. (iii) Rs. 7,50,000/- on 10.11.2005 by cheque, details given in the bank account filed before A.O. This amount was invested in the project known at Tanishq Hotel Limited in F.Y. 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld. CIT(A) found explanation of the source and nature of the impugned credit entries satisfactorily. Thus, he deleted the addition of Rs.20,00,000/-. 4. Similarly, it was held on addition of Rs. 2.3 lacs made by the A.O. The impugned deposit of Rs.2.3 lacs in cash was made on 26.05.2006. The appellant's reply that this cash was deposited from the earlier withdrawal, was found logical to the CIT(A). He further held that there was no material on record to show that the cash drawn was utilized for some other purposes. Therefore, he inclined to accept the contentions of the appellant. Accordingly, the addition of Rs. 2.3 lacs has been deleted. 5. Now the Revenue is before us. Ld. Sr. D.R. vehemently relied on the order of the A.O. and conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
