9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the capacity / financial capacity of the concerned persons. Mere confirmation alone is not sufficient. In a given case, it may happen that a labourer may give a confirmation of ₹ 1 Crore, but ultimately the same is to be decided or considered, considering his paying capacity. Thus it cannot be said that the Tribunal has committed any error. No substantial question of law - R/Tax Appeal No. 641 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 26-6-2018 - M. R. SHAH AND A Y. Kogje, JJ. For the Petitioner : Ketan H. Shah ORDER M.R. Shah, J. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 02.02.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'C' Bench, Ahmedabad in ITA Appeal No.861/Ahd./2015 f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s issued by the assessing officer and served upon the assessee. No submissions were made nor any one attended. Thereafter, further letters were issued and served upon the assessee for furnishing the details as called for. Still nobody appeared. Thereafter, a show-cause notice was issued which was served personally on the assessee. In the show-cause notice, the assessee was called upon to show-cause why the addition / disallowance on additional cash deposits as well as other credits in the bank account and the addition of interest received from the Bank be not disallowed and why the penalty under Section 271(f) of the Act should not be levied? Despite the same, the said letter remained uncomplied with. Therefore, the assessing officer procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven the unsecured loan / gift. As per the assessee, he received a total sum of ₹ 19,92,730/- by way of unsecured loan and/or gift as under :- Name Unsecured loan Gift Confirmation Statement recorded Rameshbhai Patel 18500 - Yes Yes, Dt.30.09.14 Arvindbhai Patel 18500 - Yes Yes, Dt.20.08.14 Suresh Patel 19400 - Yes No Harshad Patel 18500 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant, as gift were received from the following persons. (1) ₹ 5,00,000/- from father in law. (2) ₹ 5,00,000/- from Ashmitaben S. Patel who in turn from her father Shri Karsan Naran Kalariya (3) ₹ 2,50,000/- from his brother Shri Amratlal Ramchanddas Patel. (4) ₹ 4,50,000/- from Ashitaben Sitarambhai Patel who in turn from her uncle Shri Ramniklal N. Kalaria. In the remand report, AO mentioned that gift from relatives of ₹ 17,00,000/- and borrowing from friends and relatives of ₹ 1,50,400/- cannot be accepted as depositors are mostly labourers working in APMC Market and appellant has proved the paying capacity of such borrowings. Appellant could not prove such borrowings. It is also a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be relied upon and in support of its contention he has not produced any certificate from the agriculture department and when he was specifically asked whether he has maintaining any record then in reply he stated that he does not have any documentary evidence and moreover he has not maintaining any account of agriculture produce and bank account. He further stated that he does not have any gift deed when he gifted the amount to the relatives. So in our considered opinion, appellant has been failed to prove his case as he has not maintaining any bank account nor his relatives and friends are maintaining any bank account either they are labourers or framers. Therefore, there credit worthiness is in doubt. 6. Considering the aforesaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
