2014 (11) TMI 1155

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., met with the requisite conditions as prescribed under Sec. 68 of the Act. (ii) The CIT(A) has passed a perverse order by not considering the remand report of the A.O. dated 11/07/2011, received by the CIT(A) on 12/07/2011, even when he had called for it, repeatedly, from the A.O. (iii) The CIT(A) has passed a perverse order more so, in nor providing opportunity to the A.O. under Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules in respect of all the details/evidence filed before him. (iv) The CIT(A) has passed a perverse order and erred in accepting the plea that fact stated by Sh. Banshilal in his statement under sec. 131 was by mistake. (v) The CIT(A) has passed a perverse order in ignoring the fact of cheque-bandl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mitted that he had given Rs. 25 lacs on 06/9/2007 from SBBJ, Kishapole Branch by cheque and Rs. 20 lacs on 25/10/2007 from same bank account. Thus, total loan was in the name of Kana Ram was as Rs. 45 lacs, which was given by him from 50 lacs credited in his account on 23/8/2007 and Rs. 2 lacs on 23/8/2008. As per Assessing Officer, the assessee could not explain the source of credit, therefore, he made addition U/s 68 of the Ace to the tune of Rs. 45 lacs. Further, the assessee received loan of Rs. 20 lacs on 27/12/2007 through cheque from Shri Kailash Choudhary, statement U/s 131 of the Act was also recorded on 03/12/2010, who had admitted that he had given Rs. 10 lacs each through cheque on 27/12/2007 to the assessee. He had also explain....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....putation of income and bank statement. Moreover, Shri Kailash Choudhary himself appeared before the Assessing Officer U/s 131 of the Act and confirmed the loan given in person. He also explained the source of loan of Rs. 20 lacs, which was through the sale proceeds of agricultural land but the Assessing Officer made addition because of no evidence was submitted by Shri Kailash Choudhary during the course of assessment proceedings. The assessee received Rs. 25 lacs from Shri Banshilal through account payee cheque. He had filed copy of confirmation with PAN number, affidavit of creditors, copy of ITR with computation of income and bank statement. Moreover, Shri Banshilal appeared before the Assessing Officer U/s 131 of the Act and confirmed t....