TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (6) TMI 116
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....but relating to the earlier assessment year. The assessee having unsuccessfully appealed before the AAC has now come up in second appeal. 2. Relevant facts are these. Shri Hanumanprasad was earlier in employment of the assessee as Collie. He later started his own business as a tea vendor. He had account with M/s Kevalji Fakirchand, a sister concern of the assessee, relevant details of which are as under: . Dr. Cr. . 8th June, 1981 485 7,527 Opening balance 2nd Sept., 1981 3,000 5,000 29th Dec., 1990 3rd Sept., 1981 7,000 990 Interest 5th Sept., 1981 960 . . 7th Sept., 1981 2,072 . . . 13,517 13,517 . The explanation of the assessee was that after withdrawal of Rs. 13,517 from M/s Kevalji Fakirchand, Shri Hanuma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Rs. 2,400, the AAC held that the said expenditure related to the previous accounting years and, therefore, was not allowable as a deduction in the instant previous year when the assessee maintained accounts in mercantile system. 3. Now, contention of the learned counsel for the assessee is that the AAC erred in properly appreciating the evidence on record. His contention is that in view of the withdrawals of Rs. 13,517 by Shri Hanumanprasad from M/s Kevalji Fakirchand in Sept., 1981, his creditworthiness to the extent of Rs. 16,000 in May, 1982 cannot be disbelieved. It is also his contention that the deposits made by Shri Hanumanprasad from time to time with M/s Kevalji Fakirchand do show that Shri Hanumanprasad was in habit of making ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as to the genuineness of cash credit must be weighed on the probabilities of the case and no strict evidence, as being beyond reasonable doubts, should be expected. This is more so because the burden on the assessee is to prove creditworthiness of another person in whose affairs the assessee has little indulgence and knowledge. Shri Hanumanprasad appeared before the ITO and sworn that he had deposited Rs. 7,000 and Rs. 9,000 with the assessee in the names of his wife and son. The probability of his having made those deposits cannot be ruled out particularly when he had withdrawn about Rs.13,000 about 8 months ago from M/s Kevalji Fakirchand. The explanation of Shri Hanumanprasad that in between the period of withdrawal and deposit he had ut....