9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here in respect of most of the donors - One donor assessed to tax denied to have made any donation - During remand proceedings, four donation receipt books were produced which were newly bound and freshly written - The assessee has failed to establish the genuineness of the transactions and the creditworthiness of the donors - Decided against assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No. - 696 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 13-8-2012 - Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani And Hon'ble Aditya Nath Mittal,JJ. For the Petitioner : Rakesh Ranjan Agarwal, Suyash Agarwal ORDER We have heard Shri R.R. Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Govind Krishna appears for the income tax department. This appeal has been preferred on the following questions of law: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act?" The A.O. added the amount of Rs.13,62,575/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the income for the A.Y. 2005-06. The petitioner could not prove the donations to the society. The CIT (A) called for remand report in which the A.O. reported that out of 32 test cases out of total number of 191 donors, 11 notice returned back unserved due to wrong address; 12 persons gave incomplete replies, without annexing donation receipts. One of the donor, the only person, who has filed income tax return denied that he has given any donation to the assessee. The CIT (A) also confirmed the finding of A.O. with following observations:- "I have considered facts carefully. The AR's argument is that all the deposits were made out of donati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ritten. The facts brought out by the AO overwhelmingly cast a serous doubt on the genuineness of the transactions and the creditworthiness of the donors as claimed. Infact, even the identities of most of the donors are not proven. As regards A.R's reliance on Rohini Builders case, in my considered view, the same does not help the appellant. The AO has not tried to go into the source of the source. His enquiries have led him to a situation where he found that the identity and the creditworthiness of the source itself and the genuineness of transactions claimed are not proven. In the light of the above mentioned facts as brought out by the AO, I hold that the appellant could not satisfactorily account for the deposits in the bank account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
