TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (12) TMI 317
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in ITA Nos.496/Alld/2000 & 214/Luc/2003, for the block period 10.04.1987 to 14.05.1997. On 17.10.2008, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has admitted the Appeal No. 168 of 2008 on the following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether on a true and correct interpretation of the provision of Section 69 of the 'Act', the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assessee had made investment in purchase of gold ornaments of the value of Rs.14,01,171/-, even though the related quantity of gold ornaments had undisputedly been purchased from various parties on credit, duly supported by relevant bills and vouchers as issued by them ? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ised by the Assessing Officer and levy of interest thereupon, is valid in the eyes of law ? The brief facts of the case are that the assessee firm is carrying on the business of sale and purchase of gold and silver jewellery. The assessee firm is also engaged in repair and remaking of old ornaments. On 14.05.1997, a search and seizure operation was carried out at the business premises of the firm and at the residences of the partners. On the basis of seized material, block assessment for the period mentioned above, under Section 158BC, was passed where various additions were made. However, in first appeal, the CIT(A) has deleted certain additions. Being aggrieved, the assessee as well as the Department have filed cross appeals. The Tribu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar, proprietor of M/s. Sabberwal Brothers; (iv) Sri Dalvinder Singh, proprietor of M/s. Manpreet Jewellers; (v) Sri Surender Kumar, proprietor of M/s. Hansraj Surender Kumar; (vi) Sri Jasvinder Singh, proprietor of M/s. Govind Jewellers. Further, it is a submission of the learned counsel that the assessee has made a claim that each one of them had categorically confirmed having delivered gold ornaments to the assessee. None of the above dealer has been able to prove his creditworthiness. Merely on the ground of creditworthiness, an addition cannot be made. He read out the statements made by each party of Amritsar. Lastly, he submits that the source of excess stock of gold ornaments was attributable to six parties of Amritsar who....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to his death and he was surviving on dialysis for the last 3-4 months and could not have travelled so long to deliver gold worth four lakhs to a party at Lucknow specially when the chances for recovery was blink. M/s. Surinder Singh & Co. did not maintain books of accounts. He claimed that he visited Lucknow along with Sri Mohan Singh but it was not accepted by DD(I) because Sri Mohan Singh himself was on the deathbed and the transaction was not considered genuine. M/s. Sabberwal Brothers never found to have any transactions with the assessee in the past and on perusal of their balance sheet for the assessment year 1989-99; it appears that the assessee was not shown as a debtor to the party and therefore, the creditworthiness was not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that the substantial questions of law admitted by the Coordinate Bench proves that it is a dispute pertaining to the question of facts. The creditworthiness is a mix question of fact and law. In the instant case, the creditworthiness of six parties of Amritsar have already been discussed in detail by the lower authorities including the Tribunal. Finally, it was observed that they were not having the creditworthiness. Most of them are not assessed to tax and even if one or two are assessed to tax, their worth is low, even lower than the jewellery lend by them to the assessee. There is no evidence of genuine transaction with the assessee except in one or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the addition of Rs.20,000/-. During search, at the shop, a cash of Rs.42,600/- was found. It was shown that the same has two components, namely, Rs.22,600/- representing the part of cash in hands as per cash book. So, no addition was made out. However, regarding the remaining Rs.20,000/- it was claimed that the same was deposited by one Sri B.P. Saxena as explained in the statement by Sri Kanhaiya Lal, at the time of search. In the statement recorded during the course of search, Sri Kanhaiya Lal one of the partner has stated that Rs.20,000/- belonged to one Sri B.P. Saxena who has given for the payment of an Air Conditioner to M/s. Air Care. During the course of assessment proceedings, assessee was asked to produce Sri B.P. Saxena for the v....