2010 (10) TMI 1100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me of various persons. 2. In the cases of Shri Gurumukh Jagwani, the first appellate order has also been questioned by the Revenue on the ground that in the A.Ys. 1999-2000 and 2001-02, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made u/s. 68 of the Act made on account of amount credited in the books of account as loan in the name of various persons. 3. At the outset of hearing, the Ld. A.R. submitted that an identical issue under the similar facts and circumstances has been set aside to the file of the Ld CIT(A) for fresh consideration by the Tribunal in group cases of Shri Brijlal M. Jagwani and Others in ITA Nos. 1333 to 1336/PN/2007 (A.Ys. 2000-01 to 2003-04) (copy supplied). The Ld. A.R. adopted arguments advanced therein on be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition in question with this observation that the asessee has satisfactorily explained the credit in as much as identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of creditors are concerned with evidence in the support. This action of the Ld CIT(A) has been questioned by the revenue before the Tribunal. Likewise in the case of Shri Gurumuk M. Jagwani, the assessee claimed to have received gift of ₹ 18,48,000/- from Kasan Badani (Rs. 5,00,000/- , Binakumar Badani Rs. (5,00,000/-) and Jaykumar Chandiram (Rs.8,48,000/-), thus ₹ 18,48,000/- in total in the A.Y. 1999-2000; of ₹ 12,00,000/- from Lajwani Ahuja (Rs. 10,00,000/-) and Bhagibai Jagwani (Rs. 2,00,000/-) in A.Y.2000-01 and of &#8377....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pra) are being reproduced here-in-under for ready reference : "8. We have heard both the sides at length and also carefully examined the orders of the authorities below in the light of the compilation filed and the case laws cited. At the outset, it appears that the Learned CIT(Appeals) has ignored the comments of the concerned Asst.CIT, Central Circle, Aurangabad as made in the form of Remand Report dated 22/03/2007, wherein he has asked the assessee to submit the paper-book which was claimed to have been furnished before the first appellate authority. Though the first appellate authority has called for a Remand Report but altogether there was no discussion in the impugned appellate order now challenged before us. From the side of the Re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vanced by the donor to the assessee way back in the Assessment Year 2000-01 which was accepted by the Revenue Department, therefore, the source of the said gift in the hands of the donor was not under clout. This was the one side of the coin, however, the other side of the coin have revealed different facts that there was a paltry bank balance of ₹ 12,874/- in the accounts of the donor just before the gift. That was one of the reasons that the Assessing Officer has doubted the genuineness of the gift. Be that as it was, a legal issue has yet to be answered as raised by the Learned Authorised Representative of the assessee that whether the proceedings initiated u/s. 153A consequence upon the search were legal, in view of the fact that ....