9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . During the course of preliminary statement itself the mother and sister of the assessee had owned the jewellery and explained the source of the same. The jewellery found is ladies jewellery and hence it cannot belong to the assessee. Further the assessee is a bachelor and hence no addition can be made in the hands of the assessee. Also the statement of Mrs. Jashodaben Ravji Majethia was recorded during the course of search which shows that the jewellery is only out of gifts and never purchased - Decided in favour of assesse Unaccounted cash credit - Held that:- Similar addition made on account of creditors in the A.Y. 2008-09 were deleted by the ld. CIT(A) as relying on CIT vs. Computer Force [2010 (7) TMI 831 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] wherein held that if the receipt and repayment of the loan is corroborated by the ledger accounts and bank entries, additions in respect of such credits cannot be made. Following the same reasoning given above in the A.Y. 2009-10, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition made on account of creditors.- Decided in favour of assesse. - I.T.A. No. 3772/Mum/2011, C.O. No. 192/Mum/2011, I .T.A. No.2220/Mum/2011, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 32 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 7-1-2009. Out of the above cash ₹ 8,50,000/- belongs to me and my daughter named Ms Bhanuben Ravji Majethia and balance amount of ₹ 4,50,000/- belongs to my son Shr Lilladhar Ravji Majethia. The above cash of ₹ 8,50,000/- belonging to us are our savings for a period of over 25 years. Sir, moreover, 1 would like to add that my daughter who is aged 50 years and unmarried and I have saved the money keeping in mind for her future. My Husband is also aged 85-87 years and therefore looking to our old age and my daughter's condition, we have saved whatever is possible from our side. Since these savings are made over a period of 20-25 years from my husband's income as well as my son's income which they themselves do not know, so I am not in a position to show any proof I would once again like to say that all these amounts received are from my savings only. 5. We have considered rival contentions and gone through the orders of authorities below. We found that during search statement of assessee s mother Smt. Jashodaben Ravji Majethia from whose possession cash was found, was recorded. In the statement Smt. Jashodaben Ravji Majet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 50 yrs. I received jewellery on different occasions such as marriage, birth IOJ children and other ceremonies: I had already stated in my preliminary statement that I have received 50 tolas on marriage (i.e., 500 gms) and 25 tolas (i.e., 250 gms) on the occasion of children's birth and 20 tolas (i.e., 200 gms) on other occasions. Similarly, my daughter has also explained in preliminary statement that she has two sets of 8 tolas each i.e.,160 gms. Moreover it is evident from the jewellery found at my premise that whole of it consist of old jewellery and noting is new. Therefore, it is quite clear that the same is, out of savings of myself and my family members for a long time and gifts received on different occasions. Moreover the total quantity of jewellery found is very less. Therefore, request you to release the same. The above statement shows that the jewellery is only out of gifts and never purchased. 7. In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in adding the jewellery in the hands of assessee. 8. The A.O. also made addition u/s 68 of the Act in respect of creditors in the A.Y. 2009-10, which was deleted by the ld. CIT(A) after having following observat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ohini Builders (2002) 256 ITR 360 (Guj) Pragati Construction Co V s ITA 60 ITD 201 (Del. Trib) If the creditors having received the summons did not present themselves before the A.O., it was held that assessee could not be blamed for the same. Nemichand Kothari Vs CIT (2003) 265 ITR 254 (Gau) Once assessee establishes that he received amount by account payee cheque, the assessee has proved creditworthiness of lender. Seth Textiles Vs ITA (2003) 80 TTJ (Mum Trib) 329 Pravin Colour Co. vs. ITA (1977) Taxation 48(6)-155 (bom) Addition u/ s. 68 could not be made as A.O. had not conducted any inquiry and also the assessee had furnished all relevant details, confirmations, details of cheques and affidavits etc. Veer Metals Vs CIT (1995) 51 TTJ (Del) Trib 132 DCIT vs. Anil Kumar (1997) 58 TTJ (Del.Trib) 340 Where amounts received by account payee cheques, confirmed, interest paid and thus deducted, PAN nos. and balance sheet filed, no addition can be made else it tantamount to converting good proof to no proof'. CIT vs. Bhawani Oil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
