9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (8) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 50,000 were received from Shri K.K. Dhir, IAS retired on 30-11-1987 and Rs. 60,000 were received from Capt. Rakesh Dhir s/o Shri K.K. Dhir. On the request of the assessee, these persons were summoned under section 131 of the Act and statement of Shri K.K. Dhir was recorded on 21-8-1989 in the presence of the assessee when he in nutshell stated that the amount given belonged to the assessee. He stated that it was assessee's money and he merely provided the cover. On such facts, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 147(b) by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. Before we go further we would like to record that the reassessment proceedings were challenged in appeal before the first appellate authority who rejected the assessee's challenge and in appeal before us, this issue was raised and on hearing the parties and on examination of the evidence, we are satisfied that at the time the notice under section 148 was issued, the factual position was such that the Assessing Officer could take action under section 147(b). Therefore, this ground, we have rejected and we hold that reassessment proceedings were validly initiated. 3. Now returning back to the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment of Shri K.K. Dhir has been utilised only to the extent it supports the Revenue's action and if the statement is considered as a whole, it cannot be taken against the assessee because the deponent had kept back the information regarding the accounts in the bank and the drafts issued therefrom. Even the Assessing Officer has not exercised his powers to enforce the deponent's complete compliance with summons issued under section 131 with these documents because when summons were issued and his statement was recorded, the deponent appeared in person but did not bring the required documents though summoned under section 131 and the Assessing Officer warned him that compliance to summons will be complete only if information required is given in his office on 22-9-1989. This has not been done. 6. As regards the credit from Capt. Rakesh Dhir amounting to Rs. 60,000 it was contended that the said Captain was being assessed at PA No. 28-067-PV-3732 Distt. 1 (i) Salary, Ludhiana and was drawing handsome salary as Captain of a ship. He has confirmed the loan of Rs. 60,000 by means of a letter and the amount had come through his bank account. The failure of this party, if any, in response ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... j. & Har.) (iii) CIT v. United Commercial & Industrial Co. (P.) Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 596 (Cal.). The learned D.R. read out the statement of Shri K.K. Dhir. He contended that he had in unambiguous terms denied the advancement of loan of Rs. 50,000 from his own sources and also indicated that the amount in fact belonged to the assessee. Since the assessee had nothing to controvert this, the issue is clinched against the assessee. He submitted that Capt. Rakesh Dhir had not even responded to the summons. He, therefore, contended that the addition was rightly made as the assessee did not discharge the initial onus. Similarly he justified the additions on account of gifts received by the daughters of the assessee and the amount added on account of low withdrawals for household expenses. 9. He made a special point that the mere fact of the cash credits coming through the bank cannot absolve the assessee of the initial onus of proving the transaction to be genuine, the identity of the creditor and his credit worthiness. An amount deposited in a bank one day and advanced to the assessee on the next day without enquiry if taken as established loan would lead to very serious consequences a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of one of the creditors that it was the assessee who gave him the amount is not correct. The statement of Shri K.K. Dhir recorded on 21-8-1989 shows that when it is to the crux of the matter of establishing as to who owned the amount, he evaded a direct answer. Question No. 3 at page 2 of the statement put to him was whether he procured the pay order dated 13-11-1987 from Punjab National Bank, Chaura Bazar, Ludhiana to which his reply was, that the money for which the said pay order was procured belonged to Shri Prem Dhir. This apparently is an evasive answer and a scrutiny of the entire statement shows that it is not of such credence that on the basis of it alone, the addition should be sustained. Similarly, we find that in the case of Capt. Rakesh Dhir the sum of Rs. 60,000 was credited in the bank account on 14-12-1987.He confirmed the sum of Rs. 50,000 as advanced by bankers cheque No. 869466, dated 30-11-1987 on State Bank of India, Ludhiana and a further sum of Rs. 10,000 vide DD No. 992964 dated 26-11-1987 drawn on the Central Bank of India. His permanent account number is given. The fact of advancement of the loan is not in dispute as it is through banking channel and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eques have been issued in the name of the assessee but actually Capt. Rakesh Dhir issued cheque in the name of Miss Shilpi. This is confirmed by the Bank by their letter dated 9-8-1989 giving full particulars and showing that cheque No. 869465 for Rs. 20,000, dated 30-11-1979 was issued in favour of Miss Shilpi Dhir by debiting Savings Bank Account No. 9270/26 of Shri Rakesh Dhir. It is surprising that after such documentary evidence fishing enquiries of the type recorded in the assessment order were made to justify the addition. We see no reason to sustain the same. This amount is deleted. 13. Similarly in the case of Miss Mukta Dhir Rs. 20,000 were received by demand draft No. QFC/157-768 dated 28-11-1987 favouring Miss Mukta purchased by K.K. Dhir from his Savings Bank Account No. 11808 vide cheque No. PYR 135925, dated 28-11-1987. Not only this, both the parties confirmed the gifts. We, therefore, delete this addition. 14. The only other addition is of Rs. 9,000 added on account of household expenses. After a careful perusal of the order of the Assessing Officer and that of the CIT (Appeals), we do not find any evidence on record to justify this addition. Additions on the bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
