TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 154
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....count of unexplained / unproved gifts without considering the fact that the assessee failed to prove genuineness of gifts and creditworthiness of the donors before the AO. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,80,000/- made by the AO as unexplained unsecured loans ignoring the fact that the assessee could not establish the genuineness and creditworthiness of the depositors. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. C IT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 7000/- made by the AO out of travelling and conveyance expenses of Rs. 68,795/- ignoring the fact that personal use cannot be ruled out. 4. In the facts and circumstances of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../- and unexplained unsecured loans of Rs. 11,80,000/-, as aforesaid. 4. Against the above order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 18.3.2010, Revenue is in appeal before us. 5. At the time of hearing Ld. Departmental Representative has relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and reiterated on the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue and also requested to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and that of the AO be restored. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel of the assessee in support of his contention has relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and also filed copies of the following judgments of the Hon'ble High Courts and requested that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be upheld. - ITAT NO. 263 of 2011 - GA No. 28....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o enforce the attendance of witnesses. When these powers vest with A.O. it is his duty also to exercise these powers when requested. This view has been approved by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in case of E.M.C. Work Pvt. Ltd. (1963), 49 ITR 650 (AIL). The jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nathu Ram Prem Chand vs. CIT (1963), 49 ITR 561 (All.) has also held that it is the duty of the A.O. to enforce attendance of a witness if his evidence is material in exercise of his powers u/s 131 and if he fails to do so, adverse inference cannot be drawn against the assessee. The Hon'ble IT.A.T. a bench New Delhi in case of A.C.LT. vs. Ujjagar Singh Oberoi (2009) 121 TT] (Del.) 228 held as under:- "The A.O, has not found any f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation. This has not done by A.O. Further the A.O. states that assessee has not furnished desired documentary evidence, what is the desired documentary evidence required to support the claim of the assessee as required by the A.O. is not coming out of the order of the A.O. It is further noticed that the C.I.T.(A) has gone through all the evidences produced and has not restricted himself to only the evidence in the' form of affidavits. It is noticed that after considering the evidences being the corroborative evidences produced in the form of further correspondence and the returns of the donors, that the C.IT. (A) has deleted the addition. In the circumstances, in the absence of any evidence or submissions to show that finding of the C.IT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the donor and donee. The AO's conclusion to this effect is not sound as the donee or donor never appeared before him. On this issue the Allahabad Bench of the Hon'ble IT AT in the case of ITO vs. Matadin Snehlata (HUF) (2004) 90 ITD 203 has passed order wherein the Hon'ble bench held that there may be relationship by behaviour also. The same view was also taken by the Hon'ble ITAT New Delhi 121 TTJ (Del.) 228 (Supra) In the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and the position of law, I therefore, conclude that the assessee has sufficiently discharged the onus that lay on her in terms of provisions of Section 68 and it cannot be said that the receipts in her hands are in any way unexplained. The unilateral view ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 5,00,000/- was taken as loan from Sh. Bhagwandas from which she has advanced to the appellant. By the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme in the case of CIT vs. Orissa Corp. Pvt. Ltd. 52 CTR 138 and Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Nemi Chand Kothari vs. CIT 264 ITR 254 the assessee is not required to prove the source of source from which the creditor had advanced to the assessee." In view of the above decisions, I do not agree with the finding of the AO and addition made of Rs. 11,80,000/- being the amount advanced by Sh. Anil Kumar and Smt. Monika Goyal is hereby deleted." 8.1 In view of the above, we find considerable force in the conclusion drawn by the Ld. CIT(A) that in view of the principles laid down by the Hon'....