TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (5) TMI 897
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d unexplained. A sum of Rs. 841,079/- was claimed to be payable against discounting of cheques/drafts, the details of which are as under:- Shankardas Desai Rs.4,26,520/- Hari Textiles Rs.1,57,819/- Ganesh Steel Industries Rs.2,56,740/- Rs.8,41,079/- In course of the assessment proceedings the Learned Assessing Officer gave ten opportunities to the appellant to produce evidence in support of the explanation. The appellant neither filed the confirmation from these three parties nor was any evidence furnished to establish their identity. In these circumstances the Assessing Officer added the unexplained sum of Rs. 8,85,001/- (8,41,079 + 43,922) in the computation of income. 4.2. In proceedings before me too the appellant has not filed any confirmations. The identity of these parties by way of their addresses, etc. has also not been established. The additions are therefore, upheld. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. In the instant case the assessee is engaged in the business of discounting of drafts/cheques on commission basis. A survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted in the case of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as the evidences were not in the possession of the assessee. In respect of balance amount of Rs. 43,922/- which was found excess during the course of the survey, the Learned Authorised Representative of the assessee admitted that addition to that extent was justified. In the above facts and circumstances, in our considered view, the lower authorities were not justified in making the addition by rejecting the explanation of the assessee without making any attempt to verify the genuineness of the explanation either from the bank or from the three parties directly. In our considered opinion, power under section 133(6) and 131 are made available by the Act with the Income Tax authorities with a view that the same shall be exercised by them to render justice when the situation so warrants. Therefore in our considered opinion, the lower authorities were not justified in confirming the addition without exercising those powers. Therefore, it shall be just and fair and in the interest of justice to set aside the addition of Rs. 8,41,079/- back to the file of the Learned Assessing Officer for proper verification of the explanation of the assessee by excising the power available under the Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on is upheld. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The undisputed facts of the case are that cash of Rs. 4,13,500/- was found during the survey at Bhavanivad premises of the assessee. During the course of the survey itself, Shri Arvindbhai I. Shroff Director of the assessee company explained that the said cash belong to him in his individual capacity and was out of maturity proceeds of Fixed deposits, which was fully disclosed in his individual balance sheet. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Learned Assessing Officer observed that cash of Rs. 9,10,000/- was withdrawn from the personal account of Shri Arvindbhai I. Shroff but the said withdrawal was on 11.09.2000 i..e. 35 days before the date of the survey. According to the Learned Assessing Officer, the assessee could not bring any material to show that the cash found during the survey was out of that cash which was withdrawn 35 days earlier. Therefore, he made the addition of Rs. 4,13,500/- to the income of the assessee by treating it as unexplained cash of the assessee. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) also confirmed the above action of the Lea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Eleven opportunities were allowed for this. The evidence asked for was however not supplied. The Learned Assessing Officer has observed in para 6.2 of the assessment order that even complete books of account were not made available by the appellant. The Assessing Officer has discussed the issue of these creditors in details in para 6 of the assessment order. In the absence of satisfactory evidence made available by the appellant in support of the genuineness of these credits, the Assessing officer decided to add them u/s 68 of the I.T.Act. 6.2 In course of the appellate proceedings, it has been argued that the Assessing Officer 's approach has been impractical. Reference to the following enteries has been made in this context. Amit N. Thakkar & Co. Rs. 12,600/- Ranna Takkar & Co. Rs. 3,150/- It is pointed out that both of these are professional concerns, and the amounts represents bills issued for professional services. It is thus pointed out that the amounts represent business creditors and not cash creditors. The following explanations have also been made: Entry No. Name Amount Explanation 5 Jatinbhai ....