9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of interest earned on the cash loans advanced through hundi. 3. In I.T.A. No.4422, the department has challenged the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act on account of interest earned on the cash loans advanced through hundi. In I.T.A. No.4424, the department has challenged the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 69A of the I.T. Act, on account of cash loans advanced through hundi. 4. In all the cross objections, the only objection taken by the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO carried out u/s 147/148 of the I.T. Act. 5. At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has stated at the bar th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansactions with Shri B.M. Gupta; that a specific request had been made to provide the material and documents available with the AO, which formed the basis for making the additions; that the AO had merely referred to transactions which suggested that loans were given for different parties ranging from days to months; that no copy of statement of Shri B.M. Gupta admitting involvement in unaccounted hundi transactions/loan transaction on behalf of the various parties, including the assessee, was provided to the assessee, nor requisite opportunity afforded to the assessee to cross examine Shri B.M. Ghpta, whose statement was being relied on to make the additions; that the AO had completely failed to establish any case against the assessee; that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have committed any error in deleting the additions made. It has further been contended that the Tribunal, vide its order dated 11.09.09 in I.T.A. No.1156/Del./09 for AY 2005-06 (copy placed on record), has dismissed the appeal of the department under similar circumstances, in the case of Anil Kumar Bansal (HUF), in whose case also, the additions had been based on the statement of Shri B.M. Gupta. 11. Having heard the parties and having perused the material on record, we do not find any force in the contentions of the department. Undeniably, there is no material brought on record by the AO to support the additions, which were based on mere conjectures and surmises, without any evidence calling for such additions. Further, the very stateme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
