9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (5) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Rs. 5,000 and six years National Savings Certificate, were found. FDR of Rs. 5,000 was in the name of Smt. Kusum Gupta and was said to have been purchased on maturity of recurring accounts which were in the names of her children. Bank certificate, in support of the above contention, was also filed. 3. Six years NSCs for Rs. 5,000 were seen to have been purchased by the assessee in the name of his minor daughter Nidhi Gupta on 17th Feb., 1983. The assessee was required to explain the source of investment in NSCs. It was explained that the assessee had purchased those certificates out of his withdrawal for domestic expenses. Details of withdrawals were filed. The assessee was seen to have withdrawn an amount of Rs. 21,904 for household ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out of the withdrawals for household expenses. The learned AAC, by and large, agreeing with the reasons of the learned ITO, refused to interfere. 5. Hence, the present appeal by the assessee before us. Shri D.K. Gupta, the learned Advocate, repeated the submissions seen to have been made before the learned AAC and pointed out to page 2 of the assessee's paperbook, being a copy of letter dt. 17th March, 1985 addressed to the learned ITO. At the said page, the details of withdrawals from Kundan Theatre (Individual) account and HUF account were shown at Rs. 21,904.35. It was also shown that out of that amount, NSC of Rs. 5,000 was purchased on 17th Feb., 1983 and after such purchase, the balance for household expenses stood at Rs. 19,904.34 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the year under consideration. On the basis of the above submissions, it was urged that no addition was justified on account of the purchase of NSCs. 6. The learned Departmental Representative Mr. M.S. Bhatia placed reliance on the finding under challenge and further wanted to read something whose copy was not furnished to the Bench as well as to the opposite party. According to him, no interference was called for. 7. Submissions have been heard and record of the case perused. Withdrawals at Rs. 21,904.35 for household expenses, detailed at page 2 of the paper book, were not shown to be in dispute by the learned Departmental Representative, on the basis of evidence. After deducing a sum of Rs. 5,000 which was said to have been inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
