9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see has shown non-connection with this company than how the payments were made to Govt. Department like Mining Department, Excise Commissioner etc. under his sign and signature. 3. Deleting the addition of ₹ 2,96,583/- on account of interest income accruing from these Benami Account in view of the facts narrated in ground No.3 above. 4. Deleting the addition of ₹ 75,000/- on account of unexplained amount deposited in bank." 2. We have heard rival submissions and have carefully perused the entire records. The facts apropos ground No. (1) are that the assessee is engaged in the business of collection of Toll Tax, Sales Tax and Royalty as per the contract(s) exempted with the Government Departments. He also derived income from interest and remuneration from a partnership firm named M/s. Devganga Enterprises. He also derived interest from the Bank deposits. During F.Y. 2004-05, the assessee has claimed a liability of TDS amount of ₹ 53,562/- on interest paid. It was found that an amount of ₹ 5,24,912/- was paid as interest on unsecured loan to various parties after deducting TDS u/s 194A of the Act. However, this amount was not deposited in the Central Gov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that the beneficial ownership of the above account lay with the assessee, the assessee was asked to explain as to why the above amount of ₹ 6,00,000 be not added to the total income of the assessee. The assessee was also required to explain the source of the credit entries in account N0.1004287 of M/s. Sarjan Housing finance development Ltd maintained in The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd., Udaipur. While calling for the explanation as mentioned above, it was also brought to the notice of the assessee that in the assessment for the assessment year 2004-05, it was deduced by the then A.0. that the above accounts in SBBJ and the Bank of Rajasthan in the name of M/s. Sarjan Housing Finance Development Ltd were benami and beneficial ownership was with the assessee and not with M/s Sarjan Housing Finance Development Ltd Therefore, the assessee was asked to explain the identity and genuineness of various amounts being credited to the account of M/s.Sarjan Housing Finance Development Ltd in Bank of Rajasthan Ltd and SBBJ, Udaipur in the assessment year 2005- 06. It was also brought to the notice of the assessee that incase of failure to give satisfactory explanation, addition U/s. 68 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o above queries, it was submitted that the assessee had never been a director of M/s. Sarjan Housing Finance Development Ltd. To the question of assessee not being the director of M/s. Sarjan Housing Finance Development Ltd then how was it possible for the assessee to open and operate account in the name of M/s. Sarjan Housing Finance development Ltd. The A.O. was of the view that the assessee could not give a convincing reply and the explanation given was the same as stated in the past which does not clear the position of the assessee on this issue and in fact makes his position even more dubious. The assessee did not furnish the complete address of Shri Daya Ram and S. Ranawat and stated that the assessee has no concern with the company and therefore not possible to furnish the information. The above activities clear indicate that the assessee do not want to disclose the correct true picture. Further, from the findings /information gathered during the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 2004-05 on the same issue was conclusively proved that the beneficial ownership of the above account in SBBJ and The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd, Udaipur lay with the assessee and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal. The Appellate Tribunal has held thus :- 15. After cogitating rival submissions in the light of the obtaining facts of this case, vis-a-vis the other evidence available on record, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) has correctly deleted the impugned additions. We are in agreement with the ld. A.R's submission and the finding of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. D.R. except for harping on the statement of Gajendra Porwal, has not brought forth any valid point. We have already discussed and decided that the statement of Shri Porwal has so much evidentiary value. Therefore, we confirm this deletion. By respectfully, following the above Tribunal Order we cannot allow ground No. 2.1, 2.2 and 3 of revenue's appeal. They stand dismissed. 4 The facts apropos ground No. (4) are that the A.O. has added a sum of ₹ 75,000/- claimed to be out of a compensation amount received by the assessee from RICO on account of acquisition of a piece of his land. As per A.O. the assessee is unable to explain and relate the same to the alleged compensation, therefore, he has added a sum of ₹ 75,000/- in assessee's hands. 4.1 On the contrary, ld. CIT(A) has deleted this addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iness of other creditors namely Shri Daya Ram Nayak, Kesar Singh Ranawat, Kishore Kumar, Mahendra Singh Chundawat, Manohar Kunwar, Udaipur Singh Ranawat and Udaipur Singh Solanki is not established." 6. Through the above grounds only one issue relating to addition of ₹ 1,94,86,619/- added u/s 68 of the Act by the A.O. and reduced to ₹ 13,39,750/- by the ld. CIT(A), has been raised. The facts of this issue are that during the course of assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2006-07 it was noticed by the ld. A.O. that the assessee has shown new unsecured loans of Rs'1 ,28,32,430' The assessee was required to file confirmation alongwith copy of return and complete enclosures as well as bank statements in the case of the parties from whom new unsecured loans were acquired during the year. In response to this, the assessee furnished copy of account of the parties as appearing in the books of account of the assessee highlighting the amount of credit obtained from them which are as under: 1. Dayaram NaYak ₹ 14,06,735 2, Dhanraj Patel ₹ 09,65,993 3. Gamer Singh Chundawat ₹ 78,45,504 4. Himmat Singh Chundawat ₹ 15,10,755 5. Keser Singh ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be entitled to consider whether notwithstanding the fact that the payments were made by cheques, whether the assessee has satisfactorily explained the nature and source of the amounts found credited in the books of the assessee." Similarly the ld A.0. has also placed reliance in the case of CIT Vs, United commercial and Industrial company (P)Ltd (1991) 187 ITR 596 (cal.) where it has been held as under: 'Mere production of confirmatory letter before the IT0 would not by itself prove that the loans have been obtained from those loan creditors or that they have creditworthiness." Being not satisfied with the above submissions and also in order to further verify the correctness of the claim of the assessee, the ld. A.O. required the assessee to produce all the new cash creditors of M/s. Anachal Associates, a proprietor ship concern of the assessee with complete documentary evidences in support of the claim. In response to this, the assessee produced only two creditors namely Shri Dhanraj patel and Shri Dayaram whose statements were recorded , As per the return filed in the case of Dhanraj Patel, his only source of income is salary and interest income. Similar i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account through which the, loans were claimed to have been given to the assessee, it was stated by the creditor that he has no idea regarding the various transactions which had taken place through the said account and he has not advanced any loan to any one during the financial year relevant to the assessment year 2006-07. In view of above, it was held by the A.O. that the capacity of the lender to lend the money did not exists. In support of this, he has placed reliance in the case of C.Kant & Co. V/s. CIT 126 ITR 63 (Cal). where it has been held as under: "In the case of cash credit entry it is necessary for the assessee to prove not only the identity of the creditors but also to prove the capacity of the creditors to advance the money and the genuineness of the transactions." In view of above, the A.O. treated both the above credits as unexplained. As regards the remaining cash credits, the A.0. required the assessee to produce them personally for verification. In response to this, the assessee produced two more cash creditors namely Shri Kesar Singh and Shri Mahendra Singh Chundawat and statement of both the creditors were recorded . The assessee did not file copy of r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e as claimed. Hence, the credit claimed in the name of Shri Mahendra Singh Chundawat was treated as bogus. The A.O. also conducted enquiries under section 133(6) in the case of Pyar Kunwar and Sajjan Kunwar who have claimed to have advanced loan to the assessee. From the information collected u/s.133(6), it was noticed bytheA,0. that a sum of ₹ 1,68,000 was credited in the bank account of Mrs. Payar Kunwar mainained with SBBJ, Udaipur through cheque N0.498067 from the account N0.61000593299 of Shri Bhim Singh Chundawat maintained with the same bank and Mrs. Pyar Kunwar advanced this amount as loan to Shri Bhim Singh on the same date. Similar is the position in the case of Sajjan Kunwar i.e. firstly the assessee issued cheque to the creditor and then got the loan through cheque from Sajjan Kunwar. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee was provided copies of statement of the creditors recorded and required to show cause as to why on the basis of statements recorded and evidence gathered, the entire amount of unsecured loans received during the financial year 2005-06 should not be treated as bogus and added back to the total income. In response to this show cause, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of section 68, the burden is placed on the assessee to prove a credit appearing in its books of account. That burden has to be discharged with positive material. When it is contended that a person has advanced money or had given a loan, it has to be established that the person was of a man of straw and had the capacity to give the money. A conclusion regarding creditworthiness or otherwise is essentially one of the fact. It does not give rise to a question of law unless it is established that the conclusion was contrary to the materials on record. Section 68 gives statutory recognition to the principle that cash credits which are not satisfactorily explained may be assessed as income.' The A.O. has also placed reliance on the decision of the Honourable High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. Precision Finance (P) Ltd. 121 CTR (Cal) 20 where it has been held that mere furnishing of the particulars is not enough. In view of above facts, it was held by the A.O. that the identity of all the creditors is suspicious and the cash credits appearing in the books of the assessee during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under appeal are bogus advances received by the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfirmation of the loan ii. Bank statement iii. Copy of the PAN card having number AGZPN 6290 N 3.11. The appellant submits that the lender was having income from salary and agriculture income. Since his total income was below the taxable limit and, therefore he has not filed the return of income during this year. 3.12.The lender received the income from salary of ₹ 60,000/- and agriculture income of ₹ 1,50,000/- per year. 3.13. It is very respectfully submitted that the confirmation of loan, and PAN numbers of the lender clearly proves the identity of the lender. 3.14. The PAN Number and bank account of the lender also clearly proves the identity of the appellant. 3.15. The lender has maintained his bank account No. 51005054735 with SBBJ, SSI branch Udaipur. 3.16. The lender has been sanctioned the loan of ₹ 9,02,000/- against STDR by SBBJ, SSI Branch, Udaipur. He has also received an amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- in his bank account from Smt. Sajjan Kanwar vide cheque No. 360071 dated 28-02-2006 drawn on SBBJ, SSI Branch, Udaipur. 3.17. Thus he was having adequate funds with him before sending the direct payment to Mining Engineer Sirohi on beha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed his primary burden of onus cast upon him and the now the burden of onus shifted upon the assessing officer to prove that the loan given to the appellant by the lender is bogus. 3.30. The assessing officer has not brought on record any cogent and worthwhile material to prove that the above cash credit appearing in the books of the appellant is bogus and not real. 3.31. Thus the assessing officer has miserably failed to prove that the above loan creditor appearing in the books of the appellant is bogus and not real. Therefore, the addition of unexplained cash credit of ₹ 14,06,735/- in the hands of the appellant is unwarranted and liable to be deleted. 3.32. In view of the foregoing fact the addition of loan of ₹ 14,06,735/- made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. Shri Dhanraj Patel : ₹ 9,65,993/- 4.1. shri Dhanraj Patel has been receiving the salary of ₹ 99,000/- from Kalptaru and Dev Ganga Enterprises (certificates enclosed). He was also having the income from other sources of ₹ 21,000/- and annual agriculture income of ₹ 5o,0oo/- during the year. 4.2. He has submitted a tender to the sales tax collection of sales ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee under oath are not the conclusive evidence unless they are further supported by any other corroborating or tangible evidence. The incorrect statements do not form the basis of the assessment. Our submissions are well supported by the following judicial decisions: Pullangoda Rubber Produce Company Ltd. Vs State of Kerala (1974) 91 ITR 18 (S.C.) 4.14. The assessing officer has not placed any corroborating and tangible evidence on record to substantiate the statements of the lender; therefore, the statement of the lender cannot be relied upon for the purpose of the assessment. 4.15.1t is further submitted that the statements of the lender have been recorded behind the back of the appellant without giving any opportunity to cross-examine the witness which is against the principles of natural justice and the statements of the lender cannot be relied upon for the purpose of assessment. 4.16. In this case the appellant has completely discharged the primary burden of onus cast upon him and the now the burden of onus shifted upon the assessing officer to prove that the loan given by lender to the appellant is bogus. 4.17. The assessing officer has not brought ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e lender was having the adequate funds in his bank accounts on the dates on which he has advanced the loan to the appellant. 5.10. Thus the confirmation, income tax return and bank accounts of the lender clearly prove the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the loan given to the appellant. 5.11. In this case, the appellant has completely discharged the primary burden of onus cast upon him and now the burden of onus shifted upon the assessing officer to prove that the loan given by lender to the appellant is bogus. 5.12. The assessing officer has not brought on record any cogent and worthwhile material and concrete and tangible evidence to prove that the cash credit appearing in the books of the appellant in name of the above lender is bogus and not real. 5.13. The assessing officer has miserably failed to prove that the above loan creditor appearing in the books of the appellant is bogus and not real. Therefore, the addition of unexplained cash credit of ₹ 78,45,504/-in the hands of the appellant is liable to be deleted. 5.14. In view of the foregoing fact the addition of loan of ₹ 78,45,504/-made by the assessing officer is liable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant is liable to be deleted. 6.12. In view of the foregoing fact the addition of loan of ₹ 15,10,755/- made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. 6.13. In view of the foregoing fact the addition of loan of ₹ 15,10,755/-made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. Shri Kesar Singh Ranawat : ₹ 8,41,934/- 7.1. Shri Kesar Singh Ranawat derives his annual income near about 1,24,000/-from salary and interest. He also earns the income from agriculture near about ₹ 15,000 to ₹ 20,000/- per year. 7.2. Shri Kesar Singh Ranawat advanced the loan of ₹ 4,75,500/- to the appellant making direct payment through bank drafts Mining Engineer, Udaipur on behalf of the appellant. 7.3. He has further advanced a loan of ₹ 3,35,000/- to the appellant vide cheque No. 414502 dated 24-06-2005 of ₹ 2,60,000/-and the amount of ₹ 75,000/- were transferred by the lender on dated 23- 01-2006 from his bank account with Bank of Rajasthan Udaipole Bus stand Branch, Udaipur. 7.4. The appellant has duly accounted for the above loan in the name of the lender in his books of accounts. The appellant has also credited the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tunity to cross- examine the witness which is against the natural justice. The statement of the lender cannot be relied upon for the purpose of assessment. 7.16. Thus the confirmation, income tax return and bank accounts of the lender clearly prove the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the loan given to the appellant. 7.17. In this case, the appellant has completely discharged the primary burden of onus cast upon him and now the burden of onus shifted upon the assessing officer to prove that the loan given by lender to the appellant is bogus. 7.18. The assessing officer has not brought on record any cogent and worthwhile material and concrete and tangible evidence to prove that the cash credit appearing in the books of the appellant in name of the above lender is bogus and not real. 7.19. The assessing officer has miserably failed to prove that the above loan creditor appearing in the books of the appellant is bogus and not real. Therefore, the addition of unexplained cash credit of ₹ 8,41,924/-in the hands of the appellant is liable to be deleted. 7.20. In view of the foregoing fact the addition of loan of ₹ 8,41,924/- made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the statement of the lender cannot be relied upon for the purpose of assessment. 8.13. It is further submitted that the statements of the lender have been recorded behind the back of the appellant without giving any opportunity to cross- examine the witness which against the natural justice. The statement of the lender cannot be relied upon for the purpose of assessment. 8.14. Thus the confirmation, income tax return and bank accounts of the lender clearly prove the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the loan given to the appellant. 8.15. In this case, the appellant has completely discharged the primary burden of onus cast upon him and now the burden of onus shifted upon the assessing officer to prove that the loan given by lender to the appellant is bogus. 8.16. The assessing officer has not brought on record any cogent and worthwhile material and concrete and tangible evidence to prove that the cash. credit appearing in the books of the appellant in name ' of the above lender is bogus and not real. 8.17. The assessing officer has miserably failed to prove that the above loan creditor appearing in the books of the appellant is bogus and no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roborating or tangible evidence. The incorrect statements do not form the basis of the assessment. Our submissions are well supported by the following judicial decisions: Pullangoda Rubber Produce Company Ltd. Vs State of Kerala (1976) 91 ITR 18 (S.C ) 9.13. In this case the assessing officer has not placed any corroborating and tangible evidence to substantiate the statements of the lender, therefore, the statement of the lender cannot be relied upon for the purpose of assessment, 9.14. It is further submitted that the statements been recorded behind the back of the appellant opportunity to cross- examine the witness which justice. The statement of the lender cannot be relied upon for the purpose of assessment. 9.15. In this case, the appellant has completely discharged the primary burden of onus cast upon him and now the burden of onus shifted upon the assessing officer to prove that the loan given by lender to the appellant is bogus. 9.16. The assessing officer has not brought on record any cogent and worthwhile material and concrete and tangible evidence-to prove that the cash. credit appearing in the books of the appellant in name of the above lender is bogus and not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ifted upon the assessing officer to prove that the loan given by lender to the appellant is bogus. 10.10. The assessing officer has not brought on record any cogent and worthwhile material and concrete any tangible evidence to prove that the cash credit appearing in the books of the appellant in name of the above lender is bogus and not real. 10.11. The assessing officer has miserably failed to prove that the above loan creditor appearing in the books of the appellant is bogus and not real. Therefore, the addition of unexplained cash credit of ₹ 9,15,1 53/-in the hands of the appellant are liable to be deleted. 10.12. Thus the above documents clearly prove the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the loan given to the appellant and the addition of unsecured loan made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. 10.13. In view of the foregoing fact the addition of loan of ₹ 9,15,153/-made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. Shri Manoj Kumar : ₹ 9,13,470/- 11.1 Shri Manoj Kumar is the small contractor and was having the outstanding amount of ₹ 28,17,000/- as on 01-04-2005 payable to him with Moral, Mangal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts clearly prove the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the loan given to the appellant and the addition of unsecured loan made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. 11.14. In view of the foregoing fact the addition of loan of ₹ 8,13,470/- made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. Smt. Pyar Kunwar Chundawt : ₹ 1,70,388/- 12.1. Smt. Pyar Kunawr chundawat derives her annual income 1,61,340/- from interest. She is income tax assessee and regularly assessed to tax in ward 2(2) at Udaipur. 12.2. She was having the outstanding amount of ₹ 1,68,000/- payable to him with Mangalwad Toll Projects controlled by Shri Bhim Singh Chundawat (Individual). 12.3. She received the amount of ₹ 1,68,000/- vide cheque No.498067 dated 14-01-2006 drawn on SBBJ SSI Branch, Udaipur out of the amount payable to him from the above project. 12.4. Shri Pyar Kunwar advanced the loan of ₹ 1,70,000/- to the appellant vide account payee cheque bearing no 497981 dated 6-01- 2006 drawn on SBBJ, SSI, branch, Udaipur. 12.5. The appellant has duly accounted for the above loan in the name of the lender in his books of accounts. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eque No. 498068 dated 16-01-2006 drawn on SBBJ, SSI Branch, Udaipur out of the amount payable to her from the above project. 13.3. she has advanced the loan of ₹ 3,50,000/- to the appellant vide account payee cheque bearing no. 36068 dated 16-01-2006 drawn on SBBJ, SSI, branch, Udaipur. 13.4. The appellant has duly accounted for the above loan in the name of the lender in his books of accounts. The appellant has also credited the interest of ₹ 5892/- in the name of the lender in his books of accounts. 13.5. The assessing officer has made the addition of ₹ 3,55,892/- on the ground that the appellant has not furnished the return of income and bank account of the lender. 13.6. To prove the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the loan transaction, the appellant place on record the following documents: i. Letter of confirmation of the loan ii. Bank statement 13.7 It is very respectfully submitted that the Letter of confirmation of the loan and Bank statement clearly proves the identity of the lender. 13.8. The Bank accounts of the lender further shows that the lender was having the adequate funds with him to advance the loan t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly submitted that the Letter of confirmation of the loan and Income tax return for the assessment year 2006-07 clearly proves the identity of the lender. 14.8. The loan has been advanced through banking channel and its genuineness of the loan cannot be doubted. 14.9. In this case, the appellant has completely discharged the primary burden of onus cast upon him and now the burden of onus shifted upon the assessing office, to prove that the loan given by lender to the appellant is bogus. 14.10. The assessing officer has not brought on record any cogent and worthwhile material and concrete and tangible evidence to prove that the cash credit appearing in the books of the appellant in name of the above lender is 'bogus and not real. 14.11. The assessing officer has the above loan creditor appearing in bogus and not real. Therefore, the addition of unexplained cash credit of ₹ 23,00,000/-in the hands of the appellant are liable to be deleted. 14.12. Thus the above documents clearly prove the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the loan given to the appellant and the addition on unsecured loan made by the assessing officer is liable to be del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant in name of the above lender is bogus and not real. 15.11 The assessing officer has miserably failed to prove that the above loan creditor appearing in the books of the appellant is bogus and not real. Therefore, the addition of unexplained cash credit of ₹ 9,65,993/- in the hands of the appellant is liable to be deleted. 15.12 Thus the above documents clearly prove the identity and creditworthiness of the lender and genuineness of the loan given to the appellant and the addition of unsecured loan made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. 15.13. In view of the foregoing fact the addition of loan of ₹ 9,65,993/- made by the assessing officer is liable to be deleted. Shri Udai Singh Solanki :₹ 60,750/- 16.1. Shri Udai Singh Solanki derives annual income from salary and interest near about ₹ 1 ,20,430/- during the year under appeal. 16.2. He advanced the loan of ₹ 50,000/- to the appellant vide account payee cheque bearing no. 343986 dated 2-02-2006 drawn on Union Bank India, Udaipur. 16.3. The appellant has duly accounted for the above loan in the name of the lender in his books of accounts. The appellant has also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant very respectfully submits that that genuineness of the loan transactions cannot be doubted on mere non-production of witnesses and no addition of loan can be made to the returned income of the appellant treating the loan transaction as non-genuine merely on the ground that the appellant did not produced the lenders before the assessing officer. Our reliance has been placed on the following judicial decisions for this purpose: CIT Vs U.M Shah, proprietor Shrenik Trading Co., (1973) 90 ITR 390 (Bom.) National Feed Store Vs. DCIT (1990) 88 Taxmann i1 (Chd.) Hertz & Waves Engineers (p) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1992) 42 ITD 558 (Hyd-T) Jagdish Oil Mill Vs, ITO (1995) 82 Taxmann 67 (Indore-T) Manga Ram Deo MalVs. IT0 (1977) 8 TTJ 405 (JP-T) ITO Vs. Hindustan Cold Storage & Refrigeration Co. (1984) 19 TTJ 467 (Del-T) Bhadamal Hazari Mal Vs. ITO (178) 5 TTJ 297 ((Gau-T). ACIT Vs. Glaxy Knives (p) Ltd. (lTA No. 2105 (Mum-T) 17.3. The assessing officer has further observed that the appellant could not prove the creditworthiness of the lenders and genuineness of the loan transactions. 17 .4. The appellant very respectfully submits that he has produced the letter of confirmati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant in fact bogus in nature and actually belongs to the appellant himself which were routed through the above parties. 17.12. In the present case, some of the creditors have withdrawn their amount of their previous year's loan from one project and deposited same in Anchal Associate by the lender during the year under appeal, it cannot be said that the appellant has routed his own money through the above parties. 17.13. The observation, findings and allegations made by the assessing officer are totally incorrect and the inference ,or conclusions drawn on the basis of such findings are totally incorrect and patently erroneous and based on mere assumption, presumption, pure guess, doubts, and suspicion, fictitious, without any tangible evidence and irrelevant extraneous considerations and, therefore, the such observation, findings and allegations made by the Assessing Officer are liable to be quashed. 17.14. In the present case, the appellant has successfully discharged his burden of onus cast upon him under section 68 of the Act and the assessing officer failed to discharge his burden of onus sifted upon him and, therefore, addition of cash credits made by the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s application under rule 46A made before your honor stated that the A0 has passed the order appeal against without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to adduce evidences relevant to the grounds of appeal. The assessee has further submitted that that A0 required the appellant vide order sheet entry dated 19.12.2008 to produce before him the loan creditors with all supporting evidences and documents to prove the credit worthiness of the parties. This contention of the assessee is far from the truth and as per the assessment records sufficient and ample opportunities have been provided to the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings to adduce the evidences but the assessee has failed to do so. The assessee was vide notice u/s.142(1) dated 14.08.2008 which was duly served upon the assessee on 22.02.2008 requested to furnish the following details vide point No.7 & 8 of the said notice. Furnish the copy of ledger account of the unsecured loans, Also furnish the respective ledger account of various parties from whom the unsecured loans were acquired. In the case of unsecured loans acquired during the year furnish the confirmation, copy of return, balance sheet of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee has failed to prove the credit worthiness of the depositor and the genuineness of the transactions even though further opportunities has been provided to him during the course of assessment proceedings, During the course of assessment proceedings, the various factors and outcomes of the investigation conducted has revealed that the loans received by the assessee were in fact bogus in the nature and money actually belonged to the assessee himself which was routed through the parties in whose name the assessee has shown the loan/deposit. The findings of the A.0. have been narrated in detail in the assessment order dated 31.12.2008 and after perusal of the additional evidences now produced by the assessee before your honor, the findings narrated in the assessment order still remain true and correct, Moreover, on perusal of the copy of return of income of the deposits now produced before your honor it is noticed that these persons are mainly deriving income from salary or income as partners of registered firms. Therefore, the credit worthiness of these persons to advance huge sums of money as loan /deposit is not established and the genuineness of the transactions is also n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
