TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (10) TMI 182
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e this Tribunal mentions the addition at Rs. 45,000). 3. The facts of the case are that assessee raised an aggregate loans of Rs. 52,500 from the undermentioned persons on the date mentioned thereagainst. These loans were repaid on the dates mentioned below: -------------------------------------------------------------- S.No. Name Amount Date of receipt Date of Rs. &nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ------ Since there was an advance of Rs. 7,000 by Sri S. Nagireddy and the higher amount of credit had already been taken into account by the AO in the total amount of Rs. 52,500, a reduction of Rs. 7,000 was allowed and the net amount of the cash credits came to Rs. 45,500. The AO gave opportunities to the assessee to prove the unsecured loans aggregating to Rs. 45,500. Assessee apart from filing confirmatory letters from these persons, could not produce any other evidence. The AO was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee, as in his view, the creditworthiness of the creditors was not pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of the addition. In reply, the learned counsel for the assessee justified the non-charging of interest by the creditors on their loans as the period involved was not significant and, therefore, he pleaded that no adverse inference should be drawn merely because interest has not been charged by the creditors. 6. We have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the orders passed by the authorities below. The question which is to be addressed by us is, as to whether assessee has discharged its onus to prove the credits appearing in its books, in terms of the provisions of s. 68 or not. Under s. 68, if the explanation by the assessee in respect of the credits appearing in its books of account is not found satisfactory, the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y onus cast on it, and if at all revenue wanted to verify those loans, it would have conducted necessary enquiries. We are not satisfied with the argument of the learned counsel for the assessee that the initial onus has been discharged in this case. The onus gets discharged only by adducing primary material to prove the above mentioned three ingredients. Once such primary material has been furnished by the assessee, then the onus would shift to the Department. Merely filing confirmatory letters to establish the identity of the creditors is not enough and it cannot be said that the onus lying on the assessee has been discharged. Our view finds support from the decisions of Calcutta High Court in the case of Bharati P. Ltd. vs. CIT 1975 CTR ....