9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 732X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee. Addition confirmed - Decided in favour of revenue Unexplained cash credits - addition u/s 68 - Held that:- There is nothing brought on record by the assessee to establish that the amount in question actually represented the trade advances. By assessee’s own submissions, the amounts in question represented loans and the primary onus, therefore was on the assessee to establish the identity and capacity of the concerned creditors as well as the genuineness of the relevant transaction. As rightly contended by the ld. DR in this regard, the assessee has however failed to discharge this onus. Keeping in view the adverse findings of the enquiry conducted by the AO, which the assessee has failed to explain. Thus the amount in quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M. Jagtap, A.M For the Appellant : Shri Subhash Agarwal, Advocate For the Respondent : Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr.DR ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-21, Kolkata dated 05.02.2016 for the assessment year 2004-05. 2. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee is an individual who is carrying on profession as a legal practitioner, mainly handling the service matters. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by him on 11.01.2005 disclosing income of ₹ 1,51,780/-. The said return was selected by the AO for scrutiny and in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 68 of the Act . 4. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 67,500/- made by the AO on account of advance received by the assessee from the clients. 5. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of ₹ 49,800/- made by the AO on account of alleged low drawings. 6. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 3,03,433/- made by the AO on account of alleged 'unexplained investment for purchase of land. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete all or any of the grounds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry explanation offered by her about immediate source from which the amount in question was claimed to be given to the assessee in cash, I find myself in agreement with the authorities below that the amount of gift claimed to be received by the assessee from his mother is not satisfactorily explained by the assessee. I, therefore confirm the addition made on this issue and dismiss ground no.2. 7. As regards the issue raised in ground no.3 relating to the addition of ₹ 1,52,000/- on account of loans stated to be received by the assessee by treating the same as unexplained cash credits under section 68, it is observed that a total amount of ₹ 1,88,000/- was shown to be received by the assessee as loans from 11 creditors. During ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unts in question represented loans and the primary onus, therefore was on the assessee to establish the identity and capacity of the concerned creditors as well as the genuineness of the relevant transaction. As rightly contended by the ld. DR in this regard, the assessee has however failed to discharge this onus. Keeping in view the adverse findings of the enquiry conducted by the AO, which the assessee has failed to explain, I am of the view that the amount in question stated to be loans received by the assessee is rightly treated by the authorities below as unexplained cash credits which is liable to be added to the total income of the assessee under section 68. In that view of the matter, I confirm the addition made on this issue and di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . CIT(A) confirming the addition made by the AO on account of low withdrawals and confirming the addition made on this issue, I dismiss ground no.5 of the assessee s appeal. 10. As regards the ground no.6 relating to the addition of ₹ 3,03,433/- made on account of unexplained investment allegedly made by the assessee in purchase of land, it is observed that the investment made in purchase of land was shown by the assessee at ₹ 2,99,000/-. On verification, it was found by the AO that the land at 192C, Picnic Garden Road, Kolkata was purchased by the assessee at ₹ 5,98,000/- and further expenditure of ₹ 48,020/- and ₹ 6,613/- was incurred on stamp duty and registration, thereby making total investment in land ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
