9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bank statement of Shri Bholabhai with Progress Mercantile Co-op. Bank were not before the AO at the time of finalization of the assessment. Nevertheless, the CIT(A) has not found the same to be satisfactory to explain genuineness, identity and credit worthiness of the cash transaction undertaken by the assessee – Since the assessee has stated that the AO has not given proper opportunity to furnish further evidences in this regard, it is proper to give one more opportunity to the assessee to furnish all the details and evidences in respect of the impugned loan of Rs.33,01,000/- taken from Shri Bholabhai Kakiya – Issue remanded to the file of AO. - IT(SS)A No.614/Ahd/2010 - - - Dated:- 5-9-2013 - Shri G. C. Gupta And Anil Chaturvedi,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri S. N. Divetia For the Respondent : Shri T. P. Krishnakumar, CIT-DR ORDER Per Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member:- This is assessee's appeal directed against the order of the CIT(A)-III, Ahmedabad dated 27.11.2007 for the assessment year 2000-2001. 2. The present appeal filed by the assessee is late by 883 days. The ITAT vide its dated 11.11.2011 in IT(SS) No.614/ahd/2010 declined to condone the delay, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ients, to get signature of the client if an appeal is to be filed in his case, to file the papers in Income Tax office and if any notice / order is received from I T office, to keep it in the respective files of the clients. Thus I am looking after I T work in his office. Over and above me, there is one peon in his office. Except me there is no other employee in his office and because of this, I am loaded with lots of work. This office is handling about 1600 clients which includes case of Mahendra Ambalal Patel residing at 199/A, Patel Vas, Kochrab, Paldi and I my self is handling all his above work. 2. In the case of above named Mahendra Ambalal Patel, for A.Y. 19992000 onwards his assessment orders were passed and in his case heavy additions were made in the assessment orders. Appeals were filed against such orders to CIT(A). Appeal order for 2000-01 was received which I was required to give it alongwith his case file to Upendra J Bhatt so that if further appeal is required to be filed on his instructions, the same can be filed but due to my other work alongwith time barring assessment orders, notices etc. this order was left out and could not be presented on time but when the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we find that in order to advance substantial justice, a liberal presumption is to be made to the above submissions of the assessee that the delay is beyond its control, and reasonable cause for condonation of the delay, more so, when the affidavit filed by the staff of the counsel of the assessee has not been doubted by the Revenue. Accordingly, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal and adjudicate the same on merit. IT(SS)A.No.614/Ahd/2010 6. The only effective ground raised in this appeal of the assessee is as under: "1. The order passed u/s.250 dated 27.11.2007 for A.Y.2000-01 by CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs.33,01,000/- made by AO is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice." 8. Brief facts as can be noted from the order of the CIT(A) are as under: "The A.O. has made addition of Rs.33,01,000/- u/s. 68 for the stated loan received from one Bholabhai Kakiya, in the month of May and June, 1999 by way of six cheques. The A.O. had sought confirmation/evidence vide show cause notice dated 15/12/2006 and in response, was provided a confirmation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c. which itself indicate that the assessee has proved identity, genuineness and credit-worthiness of the lender. Since the assessee having complied with the primary responsibility to prove its case, the burden to prove that the cash credit remained unexplained shifts to the AO, and both having failed to so, the impugned addition is not sustainable and hence required to be deleted. 10. The learned DR on the other hand relied on the orders of the AO and the CIT(A). He submitted that the facts on record clearly show that the impugned transaction is 'cheque badli' transaction. The learned DR submitted that the said Shri Bholabhai Kakiya, has not responded to the notice under section 133(6) issued by the AO, and the AO has noted that neither any reply nor any evidence was filed by the assessee to prove that the impugned transaction is genuine, and hence remained unverifiable. The additional evidences such as PAN card and the bank statement of Shri Bholabhai with Progress Mercantile Co-op. Bank were not before the AO at the time of finalization of the assessment. Nevertheless, the CIT(A) has not found the same to be satisfactory to explain genuineness, identity and credit worthiness of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
