TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (12) TMI 1115
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....madabad [hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)"] erred on facts as also in law in confirming the additions made u/s. 68 of the Act in respect of Deposits of Rs. 3,20,000/- and Share application money/capital of Rs. 12,50,000/-. The additions may kindly be deleted. 3.0 The learned CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in confirming disallowance of Rs. 62,130/- made out of insurance expense. The disallowance may kindly be deleted. 2. The assessee is engaged in Cotton ginning activity. During the year under consideration, the assessee had increased the share capital and accepted new loan. The assessee was asked to file confirmation of share money & loan creditor with their name, PAN & address. The assessee filed details of share ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cash creditor for share as well as loans. Thus, the A.O. added Rs. 3.2 lacs as loan creditor and Rs. 12.5 lacs share capital u/s.68 of the I.T. Act. 3. The appellant carried the matter before CIT(A) who had confirmed the addition by observing as under: "4.3 I have carefully considered the assessment order, the above submissions and the case law cited by the ld. Authorised Representative. It is noticed that the appellant has accepted deposits as also share application money from different persons. It is clear from the facts that the Assessing Officer has while making the additions as unexplained deposits and unexplained share application money has gone in detail discussion and in case of every depositor and share holder, he has c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Precision Finance (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 208 ITR 265 (Cal.). This view also finds support from Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) and Oceanic Products Exporting Co. vs. CIT 241 ITR 497(Ker.). In view of the above discussion, I hold that the appellant has not been able to explain the introduction of money in its books to the extent of Rs. 3,20,000/- claimed as deposit received and Rs. 12,15,000/- claimed as share application money received, and hence the addition made by the Assessing Officer of such amounts stands confirmed." 4. Now the assessee is before us. The ld. Counsel for the appellant argued that the assessee had filed affidavits of share holders and explained the sources of income before the A.O. He filed paper book of 54 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eceived from her father Samatbhai Karshanbhai, who is a farmer. Copy of 7/12 extracts and 8A extracts from Land Revenue record of Samatbhai Karshanbhai filed which shows that he is having land of 3.41 hector. 2. Pethalji Jadavbhai 3,50,000 + 50,000 By cheque drawn on Mahuva Nagrik Sahkari bank Copy of affidavit of the person confirming the deposit and the confirmation letter along with copies of account filed. This person is holding agricultural land. Copies of extracts from Land Revenue record were filed with the A.O. 3. Manjulaben Manoharkumar 1,65,000 Cheque drawn on State Bank of Saurashtra. Copy of bank statement of the depositor, copy of confirmation by way of affidavit and confirmation letter from the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2,00,000 By cheque on State Bank of Saurashtra. Copy of affidavit and confirmation letter of depositor along with bank pass book filed. The depositor has explained that the amount is her accumulation from house hold savings and the amounts received from her father from time to time. She had stated that her father was having agricultural land. 8. Ravjibhai Balubhai 1,00,000 Banker's cheque Copy of affidavit and confirmation letter of depositor filed. It is explained by the depositor that he had received money from his father Babubhai Chandabhai, who is a farmer and hold agricultural lands. Extracts from Land Revenue records for the land of his father were furnished. It is submitted that the Assessing Officer thus made two add....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 76,530/- and also the assessee had debited Rs. 62,130/- which related to F.Y. 05-06 in P&L account. The assessee had followed mercantile system of accounting. Thus, he made addition of Rs. 62,130/- in the income of the assessee. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition because the assessee could not controvert the finding of the A.O. before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a copy of ITAT 'C' Bench decision in case of ACIT vs. Synpol Products Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 3903/Ahd/2008 for A.Y. 05-06 and claimed that the assessee had followed consistently and regularly the same method. From the side of Revenue, ld. Sr. D.R. relied on the order of the CIT(A) and A.O. and argued that the expenses are pertained to subsequent year and the assessee ....