9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No.2 of the assessee is allowed. Addition u/s 68 - unsecured loan - HELD THAT:- On careful and vigilant perusal of J-Form of Shri Jagdish as clearly observed that these are light printed but clearly legible and supports the status of Shri Jagdish and explanation of the assessee that the said loan creditor was owning agricultural land and earning exempt agricultural income out of sale proceeds of crop cultivated thereon. Thus, the objection of the ld. Sr. DR being hypertechnical is dismissed. No other objection has been placed by the ld. Sr. DR on this issue. AO has accepted the unsecured loan from Shri Naveen Kaushik and Shri Satbir Kaushik without any objection, but, disputed the amounts received by the assessee from said other three creditors. On the totality of the facts and circumstances under which the assessee had to collect an amount of Rs.17 lakhs in compliance to the directions of the CBI officials and after careful consideration and thoughtful perusal of the documentary evidence submitted by all the three creditors before the authorities below, thus of the considered opinion that there is no iota of doubt regarding the identity and credit worthiness of all the th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use the action is being challenged on facts law, for upholding an addition of Rs 11.00 lacs in spite of all transactions having been substantiated with documentary evidence supporting pleadings, hence order dehors the material on record. 4. Because the action is being challenge on facts law, for upholding the addition of Rs. 10 lacs in spite of having furnished all explanations supporting documents explaining the transaction, hence erroneous action which is unwarranted. 5. For kindly granting the consequential relief and (or) legal claim to kindly allow amendment, addition, deletion in the grounds before the disposal of the appeal and with a further prayer to take a decision in accordance with law in the interest of substantial justice. 3. The ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the assessee did not want to press ground No.1. Therefore, the same is dismissed as not pressed. Ground No.5 is general which requires no adjudication. Ground No.2 4. The ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the AO, in the first paragraph of the assessment order dated 03.03.2015 u/s 143(3) of the Act, noted that Central Bureau of Investigation (for short, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ote that the AO himself noted from the reply of the assessee that the assessee had entered into an agreement to sell her house No.809, Ansals, Panipat for Rs.30 lakh and had got Rs.10 lakh through cheque and Rs.20 lakh in cash from Smt. Meenakshi Monsotra, wife of Shri Ashwani Kumar Sharma and out of cash received of Rs.20 lakh, she handed over the sum of Rs.13 lakh in cash to the CBI personnel. From the seizure memo available at pages 4-6 of the paper book it reveals that the amount of Rs.30 lakh has been seized on 03.09.2011. Copy of savings bank passbook of the assessee reveals that the assessee had deposited cheque of Rs.10 lakh on 16.08.2011 when the assessee entered into an agreement to sell the property with Smt. Meenakshi Monsotra, wife of Shri Ashwani Kumar Sharma. Therefore, it is safely gathered that the assessee had also received cash amount of Rs.20 lakh along with cheque of Rs.10 lakh on 16.08.2012. The CBI officials seized Rs.13 lakhs in cash from the assessee after a lapse of about 18 days, therefore, I safely gather that the source of Rs.13 lakh seized by the CBI on 03.09.2011 is discernible from the documentary evidence as well as facts noted by the AO in the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of another loan creditor Shri Ramphal are available at pages 35-87 of the assessee s paper book. The ld. Counsel submitted that Shri Jagdish and Shri Ramphal submitted affidavits in favour of the assessee and copies of Aadhar card of Shri Amit Kaushik and Shri Ramphal and copy of ration card of Shri Ramphal were also submitted before the authorities below which were ignored. The ld. Counsel also submitted that copy of bank statement of Shri Amit Kaushik was also placed at pages 39-42 of the assessee s paper book which reveals that Shri Amit Kaushik is a person of means having sufficient funds available with him and, therefore, the credit worthiness of loan creditor cannot be disputed. The ld. Counsel submitted that the CBI officials put immense pressure on the assessee to submit the remaining part of Rs.17 lakhs for seizure in the case of Shri Ashwani Kumar Sharma under the threat of arrest, therefore, under compelling circumstances the assessee put restless efforts and collected money from five loan creditors and provided the same to the CBI officials on 07.09.2011, therefore, under the circumstances, the assessee cannot be punished twice once by the CBI officials and secondly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see that the said loan creditor was owning agricultural land and earning exempt agricultural income out of sale proceeds of crop cultivated thereon. Thus, the objection of the ld. Sr. DR being hypertechnical is dismissed. No other objection has been placed by the ld. Sr. DR on this issue. 11. It is pertinent to mention that the AO has accepted the unsecured loan from Shri Naveen Kaushik and Shri Satbir Kaushik without any objection, but, disputed the amounts received by the assessee from said other three creditors. On the totality of the facts and circumstances under which the assessee had to collect an amount of Rs.17 lakhs in compliance to the directions of the CBI officials and after careful consideration and thoughtful perusal of the documentary evidence submitted by all the three creditors before the authorities below, I am of the considered opinion that there is no iota of doubt regarding the identity and credit worthiness of all the three creditors and regarding genuineness of the transaction, therefore, the AO was not correct and justified in making addition in the hands of the assessee amounting to Rs.11 lakh u/s 68 of the Act. Therefore, the findings recorded by the au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
