9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l was justified in deleting the additions without rejecting the findings of the Assessing Officer with regard to the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions? - Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate rribunal was justified in not applying the ratio in the case of Shankar Industries v. CIT as decided by the court to the present matter?" - the appeal is partly allowed. - - - - - Dated:- 13-8-2002 - Judge(s) : Y. R. MEENA., SHASHI KANT SHARMA. JUDGMENT This appeal has been admitted in terms of the following questions: "Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in its wisdom to hold that entries reflected in the regular books of account cannot be considered for the block assessment period? Whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he block period, i.e., from 1986-87 to 1996-97. In response to that notice, the assessee filed the return for the block period also. During the course of scrutiny of the returns and relevant material available for assessing the income for the block period, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 1,11,000 on account of unexplained cash credits. It is noticed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee has shown loans from the following parties: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S. No. Name of depositors Date Amount ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Shri Jai Nath 22-4-1994 1,50 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account of bogus cash credits shown in the books. In appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal has deleted the addition holding that cash credits are genuine. Otherwise also the Tribunal has taken the view that once the cash credits have been shown in the books of account maintained by the assessee in the regular course of business activities, no addition is warranted. He deleted the addition so made. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Singhi, learned counsel for the Revenue, submits that when the cash credits are not genuine, the Assessing Officer has rightly taxed that amount in the hands of the assessee. He place reliance on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Korlay Trading Co. Ltd. [1998] 232 ITR 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justified. The creditor Tarun Arora is a commission agent on sale of chappals. He advanced Rs. 10,000 and confirmed the genuineness of loan. Harish Kumar Chaturvedi, the other creditor, who advanced Rs. 10,000 and confirmed the loan. He receives commission from the United India Insurance Company. He earns commission roughly Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 40,000 per year. The next creditor is Shri Sunesh Sharma, who is working as accounts assistant in Taj Trade and Transport Co. Ltd. He advanced Rs. 9,500 and confirmed the loan advanced. The other creditor is Shri S.P. Rajoria, who is a retired employee and getting Rs. 2,000 as pension per month. He advanced Rs. 11,500 and confirmed the loan advanced. The next creditor is Jain Nath, who is a constable a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvance shown in the name of Smt. Savitri Devi, we do not find any justification to interfere in the order of the Tribunal so far as the rest of the cash creditors are concerned. However we are agree with Mr. Singh that merely because some entries in the books of account if shown, that does not prohibit the Assessing Officer to tax that amount in the block period, if that amount has not been taxed in the regular assessment. When the cash credits are not taxed in the relevant assessment years, that can be treated as undisclosed income and can be taxed after search in the block period. In the result, we direct that except the cash credit shown in the name of Smt. Savitri Devi all other cash credits should be accepted as genuine. No additio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
