TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1976 (2) TMI 56
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 22-9-71 5,000.00 5-4-72 1,000.00 2-11-71 4,000.00 2-6-72 1,00.00 26-11-71 1,000.00 17-6-72 2,000.00 11-5-72 1,000.00 31-10-72 210.39 31-10-72 2,210.39 . . . 13,210.39 . 13,210.39 According to the assessee the amount of Rs. 2,210.39 represented the share of profits of Nathulal for the previous year which ended on31st Oct., 1972. In support of the above credits, the assessee filed before the ITO a confirmatory letter of Nathulal dt.5th April, 1972, This was in Hindi. It referred to the deposits of Rs. 5,000 Rs. 4,000 and Rs. 1,000 made on22nd Sept., 1971,1st Nov., 1971and26th Dec., 1971and recited that the above sum of Rs. 10,000 had been deposited by him on the date ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with the assessee. The relevant questions are as follows :- Q. Before going toBombay, you were at Wazirganj for 7 years what did you do in all that period ? Ans. I did business in Ghee of my own for some time and thereafter became partner of Baboo Ram Satendra Kumar having 12 paise share. Q. What did you do atBombay? Ans. I worked as Halwai there. Q. You closed down Halwai shop atBombayand received Rs. 20,000 in lieu of that and then came to Wazirganj. Is it so ? Ans. I came fromBombaywith Rs. 12,000 only and not with Rs. 20,000 as alleged. Q. Did you deposit around Rs. 12,000 with any party any where in Bank or otherwise ? Ans. I became a partner in M.s Chhotey Lal Nathoo Lal from4th Nov., 1970and deposited Rs. 9,0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,000 with the assessee and the same was therefore treated as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources. This has been confirmed by the AAC and hence the present appeal. 4. On behalf of the assessee Shri Goel vehimently contends that in the present case the assessee had done all within his power to prove the genuineness of the cash credits. The entries regarding the credits have been made in the books of the assessee in the hand-writing of Nathulal. He also admitted having written the same. He also admits having received at least one of the items back viz. Rs. 2,000 on17th June, 1972. He also admitted in reply to the cross-examination that he had brought Rs. 12,000 fromBombayand had invested it in the firm of Chotey Lal Nathulal whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rts that he had received Rs. 10,000 by way of capital from Nathulal and seeks to support this contention by entries made in the writing of Nathulal. On the other hand, although Nathulal admits that the assessee intended to take him as a partner and to give him a 20 per cent share in the profits and made such a statement even before the Inspector of Income-tax he has stated that he did not get anything more than a sum of Rs. 20,000 and that he had only lent the name so far as the other Rs. 10,000 is concerned. Now one way of testing whether the assessee or Nathulal is saying the truth is to find out whether Nathulal had resources for paying the amount or whether he was taken merely as Munim by the assessee. In this context the question asked....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ulal had withdrawn any moneys from the firm of Chhotelal Nathulal prior to22nd Sept., 1971. The learned counsel for the assessee says that if he is given an opportunity he will be able to satisfactorily explain and demonstrate that Nathulal did bring moneys fromBombay, that he had withdrawn moneys from Chhotelal Nathulal and that he had invested the sum of Rs. 10,000 for becoming a partner with Shankerlal & two others. Shri Goyel also says that Wazirganj being a small place even local inquiries would revel the truth at the matter and that it would be possible to show that Nathulal was indeed a partner who quarrelled and went away from the firm after October, 1972. In my opinion there are a few loose ends which require to be tied up in the p....