9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1385X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er passed by the Tribunal There is no evidence as alleged by the AO that the money actually belonged to none but he assessee himself. The said finding if any is based on mere suspicion. In view of what we have noticed hereinbefore, the finding by the learned Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact based on the material on record after appreciation of evidence and in our view, no question of law much less substantial question of law can be said to arise out of the order passed by the Tribunal so as to call for interference of this Court. - Decided against revenue - IT Appeal No. 58 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 15-7-2016 - Ajay Rastogi And J. K. Ranka, JJ. For the Appellant : Sameer Jain For the Respondent : -- ORDER J. K ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its are genuine, identity has been established so also when the amount is advanced through account payee cheques and the said creditors are assessed to income-tax since long, the creditworthiness and genuineness is also proved. However, the AO, noticing some discrepancies in the statements recorded, made an addition of ₹ 90 lac relating to three creditors. 3. The said assessment order was assailed before the CIT(A) who, after analyzing the material on record including statements recorded under s. 131, found that the ingredients namely, identity, capacity and genuineness in all the three cash creditors and thus deleted the entire addition. 4. The Revenue preferred appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order impugned up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taking note of the facts and going through the statements of three cash creditors, have come to a definite finding that not only the identity was established but the genuinene s and creditworthiness of the creditors were well proved. 8. Before the CIT(A), the matter was reiterated by filing confirmations which contained permanent account number, complete addresses, copy of the IT returns, copy fo computation of return of income, copy of bank statement and not only that all the three cash having creditors appeared before the AO on a notice been received under s. 131. Not only that, it appears that affidavit was also filed of the three cash creditors. The CIT(A) on the material having been furnished by the assessee before it, further grant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... into consideration. It was reiterated that (1) as far as Banshilal is concerned, he had received an amount of ₹ 25 lac from M/s Kinjal Colonizers (P) Ltd. by cheque on 22nd June, 2007 and that the said amount was duly disclosed in the audited balance sheet by M/s Kinjal Colonizers (P) Ltd. and even the assessee had placed the IT return, audited balance sheet of M/s Kinjal Colonizers (P) Ltd. along with bank statement about all transactions by account payee cheque; (2) insofar as Kana Ram Agarwal is concerned, it was noticed that he had received certain amount of ₹ 50 lac and 2 lac out of which an amount of ₹ 45 lac was advanced to assessee. Bank statement of Kana Ram Agarwal was produced and it was reiterated that all the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in the case of CIT vs Jai Kumar Bakliwal (2014) 267 CTR (Raj) 396 : (2014) 101 DTR (Raj) 377 : (2014) 366 ITR 217 (Raj) had an occasion to consider the identical fact relating to cash credit under s. 68 and took note of the fact that deposit of cash and immediate transfer of cheque or clearance of the cheque within a day or two casts a doubt as the transaction appears to be somewhat doubtful but suspicion however st ong it may be, is not sufficient. In the instant case, we have noticed that all the three cash creditors not only placed on personally in pursuance to summons under s. 131 and gave their version of deposit of money with the assessee. 10. In our view, though the AO was free to conduct an enquiry about the genuineness of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d out whether they were creditworthy or were such who could advance the alleged loans. There was no effort made to pursue the so-called alleged creditors. In those circumstances, the assessee could not do anything further. In the premises, if the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee has discharged the burden that lay on him, then it could not be said that such a conclusion was unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion is based on some evidence on which a conclusion could be arrived at, no question of law as such arises. 12. This Court again in the case of Kanhaialal Jangid vs. Asstt. CIT (2008) 217 CTR (Raj) 354 : (2008) 8 DTR (Raj) 38 held as under : The burden does not go beyond to put the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
