9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income and he has also mentioned his bank account and his NRI account through which the amount is routed – there was no force in the revenue’s contention that why should the brother-in-law would give a loan of Rs. 8.00 lacs and would not demand it back – the amount of loan stand thoroughly proved on record and nothing more is required to prove this loan – Decided in favour of Assessee. - ITA No. 136/JP/2012 - - - Dated:- 26-2-2014 - Shri Hari Om Maratha And Shri N. K. Saini,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri Kranti Mehta Shri K. L. Gupta For the Respondent : Shri D. C. Sharma ORDER Per Hari Om Maratha, JM:- This appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2007-08 is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (A), A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 26-02-1999, the AO revised the order u/s 154 of the Act vide his order dated 31-08-1999 and the total income was determined at Rs. 8,88,402/-. 2.2 However, the assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 19-11-1999 before the Tribunal who vide their order dated 27- 04-2007 after admitting the additional evidences produced by the ld. AR of the assessee under Rule 29 of Income Tax Appellate Rules, 1963, restored the matter to the file of the AO to examine the issue in the light of the admitted additional evidences and framed de novo assessment. In fresh assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to furnish all the details regarding additional evidences in support of the impugned issue which is regarding gen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Total 5,58,388/- Second Quarter: Peak by clearings 3,80,074/- Peak by cash 6,74,000/- Total 10,54,074/- First Quarter: Deposit by Deposit in Cash withdrawal (1+2+3) Clearing cash 2,22,013/- 5,07,600/- 1,71,225/- 5,58,388/- Second Quarter 3,80,074/- 9,90,000/- 3,16,000/- 10,54,074/- After examining the above details regarding peak amount, the AO accepted the same to be correct. However, the assessee has also stated that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the de novo assessment proceedings to explain the added amount of Rs. 8.00 lacs, the assessee has put the evidence of loan allegedly taken from his brother-in-law but only because of non-supporting evidence regarding bank deposit etc in the case of NRI Dr Brijendra Singhal, the AO did not accept the loan theory and has made the impugned addition. 2.4 In third round, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that hearing of the case were fixed on 2-12-2008 and 26-12-2008. The assessee submitted the evidences and documents in respect of the case and on that date the statement of the assessee, Dr.J.S. Sharma and Dr Brijendra Singhal (brother- in- law of the assessee ) were recorded. They claimed that he received loan of Rs. 8.00 lacs from his brother- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t be produced at that time. But later on all the evidences were furnished in the form of copy of NRI account, bank account etc which were directed to be considered by the Tribunal. The additional evidences produced before the ld. CIT(A) were sent to the AO for calling the remand report. The ld. CIT(A) has also gone too much in the matter in deep and dismissed the assessee's appeal. 2.6 Before us, similar arguments were reiterated from both the sides. 2.7 After considering the rival submissions, we are of the considered opinion that in the given circumstances of the case, the loan of Rs. 8.00 lacs duly stands proved. The statement of the assessee recorded by the AO confirmed this loan. The statement of the donor Dr Brijendra Singha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
