TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 65
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....were considered unexplained u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) could not have substituted his own satisfaction in place of Assessing Officer's satisfaction without assigning any error in Assessing Officer's conclusion." 2. The brief facts till the assessment stage are noted by CIT(A) in Para 4 of his order and the same are reproduced below for the sake of ready reference: "A search and seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 01.12.2004 at the business and residential premises of Shri Amar Nath Gupta group of cases i.e. Sri Amar Nath Gupta, M/s Oil Emporium, M/s Yog Builders and M/s Yog International Pvt. Ltd., 123/1F, Kalpi Road. Kanpur. The residential premises of Shri Amar Nath Gupta situated at 203, Ratan Apartment, Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur was also searched. Consequent upon search, the jurisdiction over the assessee was transferred to the Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Kanpur vide order No. 01-dated 25.4.2005 u/s 127(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by the Commissioner of Income Taz-1, Kanpur. The assessee filed his return of total income u/s 153- A of Income Tax Act, 1961 disclosing total income....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dit entries for which addition of Rs. 24,03,895/- was made. The report of the AO on these issues is self explanatory. The additions were made by AO by relying on earlier year's observations and concluding that the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the lenders/transacting parties is not proved. The records of the earlier years shows that the confirmations and other documents and explanations were not filed before AO in respect of these transactions. However, same has been filed during appellate proceedings as additional evidence and it has also been commented upon by AO, as noted above. It can be seen that the explanation given by the appellant along with confirmed copy of accounts and respective bank statement is prima-facie in order. The AO has also verified the confirmatory letters and bank accounts from the transacting parties. It is also noticed that the said parties are assessed to tax. Considering the explanation and documentary evidence filed by the appellant in respect of credits of Rs. 24,03,895/- the same are liable to be accepted as explained within the meaning of section 68 and 69 of the Income-tax Act. The explanations and documents furnished by the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rding the alleged advance given to M/s Yog International Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Oil Emporium (Proprietorship concern), it is noted by the CIT (A) that these advances were given by the assessee in his individual capacity whereas the borrowed funds were utilized in his proprietorship concern. He has given a finding that there is no nexus between the borrowed funds and the advances given. Learned D.R. of the Revenue could not controvert these findings of CIT (A) and hence, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of CIT (A) on this issue. Accordingly, grounds No. 1 & 2 are rejected. 9. Ground No. 3 is as under: "3. The CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition on account of unexplained jewellery found amounting to Rs. 24,44,221/- without appreciating the facts that the Assessing Officer in his assessment order has clearly brought out the fact that the alleged jewellery were unexplained." 10. Learned D.R. of the Revenue supported the assessment order whereas Learned A.R. of the assessee supported the order of learned CIT (A). 11. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that this issue was decided by CIT(A) as per Para 29 to 32 of his order as appearing on page N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ife of the assessee Smt. Sneh Lata Gupta and therefore, the same will be considered in the appellate proceedings of the assessee's wife Smt. Sneh Lata Gupta. From the assessment order also, we find that this Will of Mama of the assessee Shri Shyam Lal Garg was produced before the Assessing Officer but the Assessing Officer disbelieved the same on the basis that the notarized Will was not found during the course of search and by alleging that the document is not reliable document as the very reading of the whole smacks of its ungenuineness without any basis for alleging so. From the assessment order, we find that the Will was rejected by the Assessing Officer on suspicion alone without giving any concrete reason and in the remand report also, he could not give any adverse finding regarding the Will and considering all these facts, we are of the considered opinion that no interference is called for in the order of CIT(A) on this issue also. Accordingly, ground No. 3 is also rejected. 13. Ground No. 4 is as under: "4. The CIT(A) erred in allowing the addition of Rs. 1,54,383/- relating to unexplained agricultural income without appreciating the facts that the assessee has ne....