AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2007
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ging the interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C. The grounds of appeal for A.Y. 2002-03 are as follows: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) in the facts & circumstances of the case has erred in law is confirming the addition of Rs. 10,40,265/- as peak deposit on 6/3/2002 as per entries in the pass book seized from residence of the appellant pertaining to A/c No. 16860 of Shri Sube Singh treating it as be-nami A/c of the appellant without there being any material for so treating. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in upholding the action of charging the interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C. The grounds of appeal for A.Y. 2003-04 are as follows: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 297000/- on the basis of some figures recorded without any narration on a paper found in the course of search without any material to treat it as income. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in upholding the action of charging the interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C. The grounds of appeal for A.Y. 2004-05 are as follows: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 118000/- on the basis of some figures recorded without any narration on a paper ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee before the CIT(A) was that the funds in the bank account belong to Shri. Sube Singh from which the assessee and his two sons have taken some amounts as loan for investment in properties which were subsequently repaid to Sh. Sube Singh on demand by disposing the properties so acquired. 6. As relates to Ground No. 1 of the assessee's appeal for A.Y. 2000-2001 and A.Y. 2002-2003, the assessee is aggrieved by the finding of the CIT(A) more specifically mentioned in Para 5.6 and 5.7. The CIT(A) held that the assessee could not produce evidence regarding the repayment of alleged loans to Shri Sube Singh. The statement of Shri Sube Singh taken after the search proceedings stated that he knew Shri Kapoor Singh i.e. the assessee and his sons but no gift or loan has ever been made by him to them. The CIT(A) further held that the bank account of Shri Sube Singh contains huge cash deposits withdrawals, more particularly for the A.Y 2000-01 is Rs. 10,15,200 on 31/1/2000 and that for A.Y 2002- 03 Rs. 20,55,465 on 6/3/2004 in the name of Kapoor Singh. The stand of the assessee was that the funds in the bank account belong to Shri Sube Singh from which the assessee and his two sons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing Officer that the account belongs to the assessee and therefore, the amount shown in that account cannot be held as income of the assessee. There are only two withdrawals in the name of the assessee one is on 9/3/2000 which amounts to 15,000/- and the second one is on 29/1/2004 amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/-. The rest withdrawals are in the name of assessee's sons. There is no specific information given by the bank as relates to who has made the deposits in the said account from time to time (Answer to Question No. 2 of the Bank letter produced at the time of hearing). The AR further submitted that Shri Sube Singh was very old person and was living far away from Bank as well as assessee's residence, therefore kept the Pass Book with the assessee. The AR submitted that there is nothing shown in the bank information that the amount pertains to the assessee and thus the cause of action should have been taken against Shri Sube Singh and not against assesses. The cheques were withdrawn by the said Shri Sube Singh and not by the assessee. The assessing officer should have been vigilant to start assessment proceedings against Shri Sube Singh and not that of the assessee. Section 132(4A) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessing Officer in the income of the assessee. 10. We have gone through the records and proceedings as well as heard the submissions made by both the sides. It is pertinent to note that the bank pass book was found in the custody of assessee. The assessee at no point of time stated that he has not received the amounts from Shri Sube Singh. It can be seen from the entries in the bank account that Shri Sube Singh has issued various cheques to the assessee as well to the assessee's sons and this fact has not been denied by the assessee at any stage. Only the version of his explanation changed during the search and during the assessment proceedings. The assessee could not establish that the loan was repaid at particular time from any records. The assessee though has given details of his salary, the same also indicates that there are certain amounts in the accounts of assessee which were found exorbitant. In fact the statements recorded during the search was also not sufficient to prove that the assessee has not received any amount from the said Shri Sube Singh. The proceedings against Shri Sube Singh was time barred and though the assessee's sons were assessed separately, there was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng Officer has rightly added the said amounts in the hands of the assessee and the CIT(A) has also confirm it with proper reasoning in respect of the Assessment Year 2000-2001 and 2002- 2003. 11. The compilation of the Judgments submitted by the assessee will not be applicable in the present case as the factual aspects in those cases and in the present case are different. In case of Bhai Chand H Gandhi (supra) the issue was when the bank pass book was not maintained by the assessee or under his instruction, such pass book cannot be regarded as books of the assessee. But in the present case the Bank Pass Book was found in the custody of the assessee and the facts narrated hereinabove and before the AO as well as CIT(A) reveals that the Bank Account of Shri Sube Singh was operated by the assessee. Thus, this case law will not be applicable. As regards the case of Ranjeet Kumar Sethia (Supra) is concerned the issue of the peak credit in the bank account will also not come into picture as the said amount was not disclosed by the assessee and the assessee could not prove that the amount was received as loan and repaid thereafter by him. As relates to case of Ashok Kumar Chhugani (sup....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is well settled law that vague noting on loose paper found in the course of search proceedings contained some entries showing no business connection and having no heading whether the amount were receipts or payments or in lakhs or in thousands, making of addition in the hands of the assessee not justified. 17. The DR submitted that these papers at any stage were not denied by the assessee. There was no explanation about the name which was mentioned in the said paper from both the DR as well as AR. The DR further stated that these are not Kanyadan receipts. As relates to the papers found, the assessee has come up with the version of paying the said amount as Kanyadan. The DR further stated that these entries are in thousands. The Assessing Officer more specifically in para 13 of the Assessment Order stated that the assesses at no point of time denied the said document and has never contested that the said entry is not that of any amount or any payment received to him and his sons and given by him to any other party. 18. We have perused the records and proceedings as well as the submissions made by both the sides. The assessee stated before the Investigation Officer that thes....