9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 872X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same was given to various parties as accommodation entries. We have also examined the statement recoded u/s 131 of the Act by the ld. AO of the said person and while answering to question no.11 to 18, Shri Devesh Upadhyaya admitted that the cash deposited in the assessee's bank account belonged to him and he used the bank account for giving accommodation entries. We even note that in his (Shri Devesh Upadhyaya) assessment framed u/s 143(3), his income was assessed by the ld. AO at the rate of 0.10% of the total cash deposits in the order dated 16.03.2016, passed u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. Thus, we are of the view that the addition is partly confirmed by CIT (A) in the hands of the assessee is uncalled for and unwarr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncial year. The assessee stated that in fact the cash belonged to Shri Devesh Upadhyaya, a known person of the assessee who used his PAN and opened a Bank account in ICICI Bank and also operated the same. Thereafter, the ld. AO summoned the said person Shri Devesh Upadhyaya and his statement was recorded u/s 131 of the Act, in which he admitted that he had opened the bank account in the name of the assessee by using his PAN and operated the same. He was further stated that the entire cash was belonging to him. In the meantime, the ld. AO issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to the Branch manager, ICICI bank for supplying the copy of bank statement for the said financial year. The AO observed that aggregating to ₹ 18.75 crores cash was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his (Shri Devesh Upadhyaya) assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, a copy of which is available at page no. 14 to 16 of the paper book, his income was assessed by the ld. AO at the rate of 0.10% of the total cash deposits in the order dated 16.03.2016, passed u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. Considering these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the addition is partly confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) in the hands of the assessee to the tune of ₹ 1,06,250, is uncalled for and unwarranted and cannot be sustained as this income has been assessed in the hands of Shri Devesh Upadhyaya. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT (A) on this issue and direct the ld. AO to delete the deletion. 06. In the result, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
