9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 1119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record filed by the assessee to show that the loans in question have been repaid by the assessee - I.T.A. No.5849/Mum/2011 - - - Dated:- 6-9-2013 - SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM For the Appellant : Shri Deepak Tralshawala For the Respondent : Shri Dipak Ripote O R D E R PER : VIJAY PAL RAO, JM This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.6.2011 of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) for the assessment year 1997-98. 2. The assessee has filed the concise grounds as under: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Commissioner of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) 3, Mumbai, erred in i. Confirming the addition of ₹ 30,00,000/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Trading 17.2.1997 1 0,00,000 2. Raj Electricals 18.3.1997 5,00,000 3. Aarkay Incorporated 18.3.1997 5,00,000 4. Raj Electricals 21.3.1997 5,00,000 5. HPS International 21.3.1997 5,00,000 Total 30,00,000 The AO issued summons u/s 131 to all the five parties but the summons were not served to the parties and received back with the postal remarks left and not known as the add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss the assessment order dated 31.12.2010 and again made the addition as in the earlier assessment orders. The assessee has again carried the matter before this Tribunal in the third round of litigation. 5. Before us the Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the Assessing Officer has not passed the order as per the directions of this Tribunal vide order dated 11.9.2009. He has referred the assessment order and submitted that the AO has repeated the addition on the basis of the statement of Mr. Surendra Khandhar and has not decided the issue on merits by ignoring the said statement. On query from the Bench regarding the repayment of the loans in question the assessee filed the documents showing the repayment of loans in question and su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e cross examination could not be allowed; therefore, we hold that the statement of Shir Khandhar cannot be used against the assessee. 5.1 However, on merit, we are of the considered view that the matter needs re-verification at the end of the AO as the case has not been examined properly on merit. If the statement of a third party ignored then in that case, onus lay upon the assessee to prove the transaction by adducing necessary confirmation and evidences. No such efforts were made by the assessee to obtain the confirmation from the respective parties. Neither the department has tried to verify from the Income Tax department, in spite of furnishing PAN etc., of the respective parties, as stated by the ld. Counsel of the assessee. Theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they are not repeated here again. 11. I do not find that the submission made by the authorised representative has any materials to serve his purpose. Considering the statement on oath provided by the lender of the loan, there is no iota of doubt that the assessee has introduced his undisclosed cash under the garb of accommodation loan. In the circumstances, the loan so received are unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and same are brought to tax. Accordingly, a sum of ₹ 55,25,000/- is assessed as undisclosed income of the assessee for the year. Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 are initiated separately. 12. Subject to the above remarks, the total income of the assessee is computed as under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
