TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (9) TMI 1109
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and disposed off vide this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The assessee filed the appeals after 88 days delay and also filed petitions praying condonation of the delay stating that due to multiple litigations at various places, the assessee could not file the present appeal in time and the appeals are filed belatedly by 88 days and prayed for condonation of delay. We have gone through the petition filed by the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee is came across various litigations on income tax matters with the department one after another. The delay in filing the appeal is bona fide and the same is condoned and the appeals of the assessee's are admitted. 3. First we will take up the assessee's appeals in ITA Nos. 882, 1110, 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ings, both are in appeal before us. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. With regard to ground in ITA No.1110/ H/2009 & 1111/H/2009, the assessee submitted that the additional income offered by the assessee at ₹ 6 lakhs and ₹ 12.20 lakhs for the assessment year 2002-03 & 2003-04 respectively to be considered as a source of income to explain the impugned credit. It is also submitted that the Members of the assessee (HUF) Viz., Shri Venugopal, Shri Purushottam, Smt. Santosh Devi and Smt. Sunita were filed their respective returns of income in all these assessment years and the income declared by them in their returns to be considered as available sources in addition to the income genera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee towards unexplained cash credit appearing in the names of employees of firm M/s Satyanarayana Venugopal. Hence, we are not able to agree with the contention of the DR. Accordingly, it is fair to give credit to the income declared by the Members of the assessee HUF in their returns as well as the additional income declared by the assessee as fund available to explain the unexplained credit appearing in the books of assessee HUF provided these income has not been utilized by respective parties by any way. Regarding giving opportunity to the assessing officer to verify the material available on record, before accepting the claim of the assessee for telescoping the additions with the declared income of assessee's family members, the CIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sale price or there is no doubt regarding the existence of the company. No statement recorded either from the agent M/s Sriram Securities or from the purchaser Smt. E. Ashtalakshmi, E. Venkanna and Shri S. Sai Baba. There is no incriminated document to suggest the bogus nature of the documents. No seized material brought on record to suggest any cash amount was paid back by the assessee to the purchaser. The assessing officer came to the conclusion to the bogus nature of transaction only on assumption and presumption. It is settled law that suspicion however strong cannot take place of legel proof as has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of Charan Shaw and Others Vs. CIT (37 ITR 271). In this case, assessing officer has not brought....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee in the form of statement of affairs, filed by the assessee before the date of search with regular return of income was found to be reliable to support the case of the assessee that the relevant transactions or purchase and sale shares were genuine. The only reason to treat the transactions are not genuine is that the serial nos. of the purchase and sales bills were not in chronological order. The purchase sales bills are not in serial number that may be the mistake of broker M/s Sriram Securities and for that mistake the assessee cannot be held responsible since the bill book not under the custody of the assessee. Moreover, the department has not taken any pain to examine all the parties involved and recorded their statement and confr....