9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 1090X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (b) In doing so the CIT(Appeals)-I, Agra has erred in law and on facts even though the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the claimed share transactions for the reasons given by the A.O. in the assessment order; (c) That the CIT(Appeals)-I, Agra has erred in law and on facts in deleting the aforesaid addition by admitting additional evidence (which was not produced before the (A.O.), without allowing the A.O. a reasonable opportunity as provided in Rule 46A(3) of IT Rules, 1962; 2. (a) That the CIT(Appeals)-I, Agra has erred in law in deleting addition of ₹ 69,000/- (comprised both receipt and repayment of ₹ 34,500/-) made on account of bogus cash loans (unsecured loans) of ₹ 17,000/- and ₹ 17,500/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was sold for ₹ 10,16,008/- on 04.03.2005. The difference between sale and purchase of shares amounting to ₹ 9,70,468/- has been treated by the assessee as Long Term Capital Gain and offered the same for taxation @ 10%. The assessee was required to prove the genuineness of the purchase and sale of shares. To prove the same, the assessee filed various documentary evidences before the Assessing Officer which he has shown in the Assessment Order passed under section 143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2007. After considering all the evidences produced by the assessee as well as in view of various decisions rendered by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the transaction shown by the assessee i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... First Appellate Authority. He stated that the assessee has filed written submission along with supporting documentary evidences before the ld. First Appellate Authority only to support the written arguments filed before the CIT(A). No fresh evidence has been filed by the assessee before the ld. First Appellate Authority. He drew our attention towards paragraph no.3.1 of the impugned order as well as the Assessment Order. He also drew our attention towards each and every documents filed by the assessee before the ld. First Appellate Authority for proving that no fresh evidence has been filed by the assessee before the ld. First Appellate Authority. All documentary evidences are already available with the Assessing Officer. He further stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Authority has rightly deleted the addition of ₹ 10,12,968/- by appreciating the evidences produced by the assessee. Therefore, no interference is called for in the well reasoned order passed by the ld. First Appellate Authority. We dismiss the issue involved in ground no.1 and uphold the impugned order. 8. As regards to the addition of ₹ 69,000/- deleted by the ld. First Appellate Authority, after considering the arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for the assessee as well as the ld. Departmental Representative along with the finding given by the Revenue Authorities, we are of the considered opinion that no doubt the assessee has filed confirmation letter from all the persons from whom these deposits have been taken by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 274 of the Act on this score. 5.2 In the course of appellate proceedings, the AR of the appellant has objected to the additions on the following grounds:- - The appellant had shown deposits of Amanat with the assessee by the following persons: a. Ram Singh b. Vishnu Sharma c. Vrindaban Das __ d. Med Pal e. Jeet Ram f. Guddu __ g. Rajesh Agarwal Confirmation letters from all the above persons were filed. On 04.12.2007, the Assessing Officer directed the appellant to produce the aforesaid parties for verification. On 14.12.2007, the said parties attended and their statements were recorded. - Shri Vrindaban Das and Shri Guddu have signed the confirmation letters thereby confirming the deposits. Howev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quired since apparently the loans were denied by the aforesaid persons. - The confirmation letters bear the signatures of the alleged depositors. The alleged depositors have not denied the confirmation letters given by them to the assessee. The depositor Shri Vrindaban Das is the colleague of the appellant s husband and hence may have denied personal acquaintance with the appellant. - The AO has not disputed the identity of the depositors who had been produced by the appellant herself as evident from ordersheet entry dated 14.12.2007 which is extracted below: 14.12.2007: Further assessee produce the cash creditor namely Shri Vrindaban Dass, Shri Madpal, Shri Vishnu Sharma and Shri Goodu, for verification. The remaining ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
