9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 665X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heque to the assessee has been shown to have been received as gift from grand father and past savings as well as withdrawal of ₹ 43,000/- in previous months from her bank account. We further find that assessee has submitted details of grand father of Falguniben Patel namely Mr. Ramanbhai N. Patel who has retired from railway department and is owning 8 bighas of agricultural land. In these circumstances, we are inclined to believe that there was some source of cash deposit of ₹ 50,000/- in the bank account of Falguniben Patel and we accordingly find that the loan taken from Falguniben Patel to be genuine. In view of our above discussion, we hold that out of the addition on account of unexplained cash deposit of ₹ 2,50,000/- loan of ₹ 50,000/- from Falguniben Patel is explained and we delete the addition of ₹ 50,000/-.- Decided in favour of assessee in part. TDS u/s 194C - disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - Held that:- The assessee has filed its return of income for Asst. Year 2004-05 on 28.10.2004 and has shown income from business or profession under the deeming provisions of section 44AB of the Act available for income from running heavy vehicles. Certai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ii) Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act Rs.2,50,507/- 3. Aggrieved assessee went in appeal before ld. CIT(A) but the same was dismissed by the first appellate authority observing that assessee could not prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the unexplained cash credit of ₹ 2,50,000/- received from Ashwinkumar L. Patel ₹ 75,000/- Sumitraben J Patel Rs.1,25,000/- Falguniben Patel ₹ 50,000/- and disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act was confirmed as the assessee has not deducted TDS u/s 194C of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. As regards ground no.1 against the action of ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition of ₹ 2,50,000/- in respect of unexplained cash credit, the ld. AR submitted that the sum of ₹ 2,50,000/- was received from - Ashwinkumar L. Patel ₹ 75,000/- Sumitraben J Patel Rs.1,25,000/- Falg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inkumar L. Patel ₹ 75,000/- Sumitraben J Patel Rs.1,25,000/- Falguniben Patel ₹ 50,000/- 8.1 As regards unsecured loan received from Ashwinkumar L. Patel at ₹ 75,000/- and from Sumitraben J. Patel of ₹ 1,25,000/-, assessee has not provided any details except the affidavits and copies of some ledger account and bank account of Asst. Year 2007- 08 and following years. These affidavits cannot be taken as a substantive proof in order to satisfy the provisions of section 68 of the Act in regard to the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of loan taken during the year. No evidence in the form of PAN, bank statement, income-tax return have been put on record before the lower authorities. In these circumstances we find that assessee has nothing more to prove the genuineness of unsecured loans taken from Ashwinkumar L. Patel and Sumitraben J. Patel at ₹ 75,000/- and ₹ 1,25,000/- respectively. 8.2 As regards loan taken from Falguniben Patel of ₹ 50,000/- we find that this loan amount has been taken by cheque and the source of cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed for carrying out any work mentioned in sub-clause (e) of clause (iv) of the Explanation, tax shall be deducted at source- ( i ) on the invoice value excluding the value of material, if such value is mentioned separately in the invoice; or ( ii ) on the whole of the invoice value, if the value of material is not mentioned separately in the invoice. (4) No individual or Hindu undivided family shall be liable to deduct income-tax on the sum credited or paid to the account of the contractor where such sum is credited or paid exclusively for personal purposes of such individual or any member of Hindu undivided family. (5) No deduction shall be made from the amount of any sum credited or paid or likely to be credited or paid to the account of, or to, the contractor, if such sum does not exceed [thirty] thousand rupees : Provided that where the aggregate of the amounts of such sums credited or paid or likely to be credited or paid during the financial year exceeds [seventy-five] thousand rupees, the person responsible for paying such sums referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to deduct income-tax under this section. (6) No deduction shall be made from any s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
