9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 992X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Chouhan has not been placed on record till date. We therefore in the given facts and circumstances of the case are inclined to confirm the view of the Ld.CIT(A) as the assessee has been unable to prove the creditworthiness of the alleged cash credit of ₹ 4,00,000/-. We, therefore find no infirmity in the orders of Ld.CIT(A) confirming the addition - Decided against assessee Undisclosed interest income addition - assessee has been unable to prove that the interest income earned from fixed deposit receipts were not earned by the him during the year - Held that:- Since the assessee has not shown the interest income of ₹ 51,760/- earned on FDR’s is his return of income, no interference is called for in the findings of Ld. CIT(A) and therefore Ground is dismissed. - ITA No. 417/Ind/2015 - - - Dated:- 19-1-2018 - Shri Kul Bharat, Judicial Member And Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member Respondent by : Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.DR Appellant by : Shri Ashish Goyal Shri N.D. Patwa, Advocates ( AR ) ORDER Per Manish Borad, AM This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Bhopal [in short re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as made u/s 69 of the Act. The Ld.AO was also not satisfied with the creditworthiness and genuineness of unsecured loan of ₹ 4,00,000/- received on 23.9.2009 at ₹ 2,00,000/- each received from Shri Rajesh Singh Chouhan and Shri Mithlesh Singh Chouhan. Addition was made u/s 68 of the Act at ₹ 4,00,000/- for this unexplained cash credit. The Ld.A.O also made addition for undisclosed interest income from FDRs at ₹ 51,760/- which were not offered to tax in the income tax return. Accordingly the Ld.A.O completed the assessment, assessing income at ₹ 28,09,250/- and agriculture income of ₹ 1,40,000/-. 4. Aggrieved assessee appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the additions confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A) raising various grounds of appeal. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed total additions of ₹ 17,40,130/- on account of following; Details Amount (i) Unexplained investment u/s 68 of the Act Rs.12,88,370/- (ii) Unexplained cash credit ₹ 4,00,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 8,07,580/-, but in the second cash flow statement, the opening cash was enhanced to ₹ 9,27,771/-. Similarly, cash in the hands of his wife, Smt. Sudha Singh, wazs claimed in the first cash flow statement at ₹ 3,45,850/-, whereas in second cash flow statement, it was increased to ₹ 5,19,850/-. It may be noted that the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Amal Kumar Chkaraboty Vs. CIT (1994) 207 ITR 376 (Cal.) observed that the Tribunal was right in not giving credit to assessee s divergent statement at various stages regarding source of investment. In the appellant s case also, the appellant had given divergent explanation regarding the quantum of opening cash available with him and his wife and, therefore, the same is not acceptable. Secondly, the appellant contended that cash withdrawal by him from his saving bank account in the last quarter of 2008 and first quarter of 2009 was available with him, which was deposited in the saving bank account on 20.07.2009. But as mentioned by the A.O also, that the appellant had made total withdrawals of cash amounting to ₹ 17,34,000/- in F.Y 2007- 08 and F.Y 2008-09 on different dates and had also deposited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ral income has to be made. In the case of Smt. Sangita Singh Ors. Vs. ITO (2011) 18 ITJ 630 (Trib-Indore), the Hon ble ITAT estimated the agricultural income at ₹ 22,000/- per acre. The agricultural land of the appellant is fully irrigated. The appellant had claimed agricultural income of ₹ 3,60,000/- from 17.55 acres i.e.about ₹ 20,513/- per acre, which in my opinion, was reasonable considering the crops grown on the land. It may also be noted that upto the month of July in a year, the appellant received one crop i.e. Rabi and, therefore, the claim of the appellant of availability of cash of ₹ 1,80,000/- out of agricultural income is acceptable. Therefore, it is held that a sum of ₹ 1,80,000/- of cash was available with the appellant on account of net agricultural income for cash deposits in the saving bank account as against credit of ₹ 70,000/- allowed by the Ld.A.O out of agricultural income. The next issue is regarding availability of cash from the income of appellant and his wife till July, 2009 of that year. During the period under consideration, the appellant claimed that he and his wife had received income from salary, tution fees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A) are of the view that it would be justified to accept a sum of ₹ 2,50,000/- each as the opening cash balance of both the assessee and his wife. The assessee accordingly gets relief of ₹ 3,00,000/- over and above the relief granted by Ld.CIT(A) of ₹ 3,56,630/-. In the result the addition made u/s 69 of the Act is sustained to ₹ 9,88,370/-. In the result Ground No.2, 3, and 4 of the assessee are partly allowed. 11. Now we take up Ground No.5 6 which challenges the addition of ₹ 4,00,000/- confirmed u/s 68 of the Act by Ld.CIT(A). We find that the assessee received loan of ₹ 2,00,000/- each from Shri Rajesh Singh Chouhan and Shri Mithlesh Singh Chouhan on 23.9.2009. We find that the impugned addition u/s 68 was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) observing as follows duly following various judgments of Hon ble Courts. (iii) I carefully considered the submission of the appellant and facts of the cases. It is a trite law that if there is a credit in the bank account of the assessee, the onus is on the assessee to prove the source of that deposit with cogent evidence. If he claims that the amount was received as loan from other person, the onu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the creditor and genuineness of the transaction. Therefore, the assessee has to adduce considerable evidence which is trustworthy and believable that the unsecured loan shown by the assessee is genuine. Hence, this issue has to be decided considering the facts and surrounding circumstances of each unsecured loans as to whether the assessee has successfully discharged his onus to prove the identity of the creditor, creditworthiness of the creditor and genuineness of the transactions. In the light of above discussion, in the appellant s case, it is noticed that the appellant had filed confirmations of the creditors with PAN only. Bank statement of Shri Rajesh Chouhan was filed. But copy of bank statement of Smt. Mithlesh Chouhan was not filed. The appellant had not filed any cogent evidence to prove the creditworthiness of the creditors. Generally, loans are taken at the time of need but it is pertinent to note in this case that the appellant, after taking loans from these two persons, had converted the amounts into fixed deposits. Considering the totality of facts and surrounding circumstances of the case, I am in agreement with the findings of the A.O that the appellant had not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... han and of ₹ 20,00,000/- from Smt. Mithlesh Chouhan. Therefore, the addition on account of unexplained credit can be made u/s 68 or u/s 69 of the Act in the appellant s case. Hence, the addition of ₹ 4,00,000/- was required to be made on account of unexplained advance of ₹ 2,00,000/- shown in the name of Shri Rajesh Chouhan and of ₹ 20,00,000/- in the name of Smt. Mithlesh Chouhan. In view of the above, the addition of ₹ 4,00,000/- is confirmed. 12. We however find that even though permanent account number, confirmation of accounts and amount being received through account payee cheque is not disputed at the end of revenue but in order to prove the lender of loan being creditworthy, the source of his income needs to be brought on record alongwith bank statement. The Ld.AO has mentioned categorically the fact in the assessment order in which Shri Rajesh Singh Chouhan one of the lender opened his bank account on 30.6.2009 and thereafter cash has been deposited. No possible source of income justifying the alleged cash deposit in the bank account of Shri Rajesh Singh Chouhan has been brought on record. Copy of bank account of another lender Shri M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
