2012 (9) TMI 194

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tantiate the genuineness of transaction. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the fact that the assessee has made a self contradictory statement as the assessment order states that on 18.12.2009 the assessee filed his return own affidavit stating that for the on non residents, it would take time to affirm the transactions on oath whereas the fact is that during the appellate proceedings before the Ld CIT(A), the assessee had allegedly produced a notarized affidavit from the lender which is dated 27.2.2009. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in holding that loan amount debited from the account of lender on 4.4.2009 and credited in the assessee's....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncome from undisclosed sources. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before Ld CIT(A) and submitted as under:- i) That Assessing Officer has not given detail of the impugned addition of Rs.86,40,000/- but SB A/c No.60773 and A/c No.90242050000140 of Mrs. Kalpana Dalal with Syndicate Bank, New Delhi would show that following amounts were debited to her bank account qua the amount deposited in assessee's bank account. 5.4.2006 Rs.26,05,000/- 15.7.2006 Rs.15,50,000/- 3.8.2006 Rs.9,00,000/- 9.8.2006 Rs.1,00,000/- 10.8.2006 Rs.6,00,000/- 9.9.2006 Rs.6,20,000/- 9.9.2006 Rs.4,15,000/- 9.2.2007 Rs.5,90,000/- 12.2.2007 Rs.2,00,000/- 26.2.2007 Rs.10,60,000/-   -----------....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and requested for admission of the same as additional evidence. 5. In view of the above, the Ld AR requested that addition of Rs.41,55,000/- (Rs.26,05,000/- + Rs.15,50,000/-) be deleted as fully explained and in respect of other additions of Rs.44,85,000/- he argued that all amounts were received by cheques but in view of non cooperation by Mrs. Kalpana Dalal the same may be considered on merit. 6. The Ld CIT(A) after calling the remand report admitted additional evidence and on the basis that amount of Rs.41,55,000/- was fully explained deleted the addition to that extent and upheld the addition in respect of the remaining amount of Rs.44,85,000/-. 7. Aggrieved the revenue has filed appeal before this Tribunal. 8. The Ld DR at....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al on 4.7.2006 & 15.7.2006 (paper book page 30). Mrs. Kalpana Dalal had received these amounts for giving to the assessee as follows:- i) Rs.15,30,000/- from assessee's own OD A/c No.0619009301001637 with PNB (paper book page 5. ii) Rs.10,36,000/- from Shri RS Chakraborty A/c No.6-0771 with Syndicate Bank (paper book page 7 back side). iii) Rs.6800/- from Shri RS Chakraborty A/c No.61425 with Syndicate Bank (paper book page 9 back side). iv) Rs. 29,000/- from Mrs. Kalpana Dalal A/c No. 61434 with Syndicate Bank (paper book page 10 back side). v) Rs.800/- from Ruchi Chakraborty A/c No.61439 with syndicate Bank (paper book page 11 back side). Therefore, the amount of Rs.26,55,000/- is fully explained. Similarly Rs.15,50,000/....