TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 1339
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hand, ld. DR relied upon order of the authorities below. We, therefore, decide the respective grounds of appeal in assessee's appeal as under. 4. On ground No. 1, assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 3,30,000/- on account of 'Istridhan' under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer noticed that assessee made addition to his capital account by Rs. 3,30,000/-. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to produce documentary in support of the explanation of source of this deposit. The assessee submitted that addition of Rs. 3,30,000/- was out of savings (Istridhan) of his wife. The Assessing Officer, however, observed that explanation of the assessee is not convincing and not supported by any documentary evidence. The Assessing Officer further observed that it was not believable that such heavy amount was kept at home by wife of the assessee. The Assessing Officer, accordingly, treated the same as unexplained and made addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. 5. The assessee challenged the addition before ld. CIT(Appeals) and it was explained that assessee was married about 35 years ago and savings of Rs. 3,30,000/- out of 'Istridhan'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....noted that he did not remember the day and date when the money was handed over to him. In his statement, Shri Jeet Singh further stated that money was advanced to Shri Basant Singh, assessee at his shop and his two brothers namely Shri Hari Singh and Shri Balbir Singh also accompanied him at the time of passing of the said money. The name of the shop of assessee was found to be not known to the creditor and further, he could not remember the denomination of the notes given to the assessee. The Assessing Officer also recorded statement of Shri Hari Singh, brother of Shri Jeet Singh and as per his statement, Shri Jeet Singh alone has given this money to the assessee at his home. Shri Hari Singh further stated that he and his brother Shri Balbir Singh never accompanied Shri Jeet Singh at the time of handing over the money to the assessee. From these statements, Assessing Officer observed that same were contradictory and as such, did not believe the statement of Shri Jeet Singh. The Assessing Officer also observed that assessee is not property dealer nor dealing in the property, therefore, there was no reason why Shri Jeet Singh or Shri Hari Singh has given this much amount to the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8 lacs and one bag containing Rs. 41,75,000/- and the entire money was seized by the police. It was further stated that this amount was to be distributed to various persons as per directions from Billu of Philippines. Even list of the persons concerned, to whom money was to be distributed, was stated to have been sent to assessee's son through FAX. The assessee admitted in his statement that in token of this service, assessee received commission @ 800 per lac. The Assessing Officer, observed that assessee was doing hawala business and said money belong to him. The assessee did not give the name of S/Shri Jeet Singh, Hari Singh and Gurdiwan Singh etc. to the police or the Enforcement Directorate, when his statement was recorded. The Assessing Officer, therefore, inferred that assessee failed to prove the source of the money credited in the books of account and addition of Rs. 36,04,000/- was made in the hands of the assessee. 10. The assessee challenged the addition before ld. CIT(Appeals) and written submission of the assessee is reproduced in the appellate order in which the assessee briefly explained that there are three credits in the name of Shri Jeet Singh and others Rs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sidence and false case have been planted upon him. It was also explained that the only evidence is statement recorded of Shri Basant Singh on 29.10.2005. A bare reading of the statement revealed that it is not clear who has recorded the statement before whom and where the statement has been recorded, whether it is recorded under FEMA Act or otherwise. The assessee also retraced from the statement later on, therefore, it could not be said to be voluntary statement of the assessee. No material or evidence has been brought on record in support of this statement. This statement was recorded just to implicate the assessee in a false case. It was submitted that there are various judicial pronouncements to prove that when statement has not been recorded by duly authorized Gazetted Officer under the respective Act, such statement cannot be relied upon in evidence. The assessee relied upon several decisions in support of this contention. 12. The ld. CIT(Appeals), considering the explanation of the assessee and material on record confirmed all the three additions. The ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the finding of the Assessing Officer because there was contradiction in the statement of S/Shri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ained that they have sold the land and have struck a deal for purchase of another land and the land was to be purchased in proportionate share of ½ with Shri Basant Singh i.e. assessee. In his statement, he has explained that amount in question has been paid by his brother Shri Jeet Singh. He has also explained source of their payment. PB-50 is statement of Shri Jeet Singh recorded by Assessing Officer 'on oath' at assessment stage in which he has confirmed to have given amount of Rs. 25,75,000/- to the assessee for purchase of land as advance. He has confirmed that he is making statement of his own consent and without any pressure in the presence of the assessee. PB-94 is Agreement to Sell by S/Shri Hari Singh, Jeet Singh, Gurdeep Singh and Balbir Singh to prove the source of giving amount in question to the assessee. PB-119 is the copy of account of these three persons in the books of account of the assessee showing credit of Rs. 25,75,000/-. The assessee explained before ld. CIT(Appeals) that during investigation conducted by DDIT, Ludhiana it was explained that S/Shri Jeet Singh, Hari Singh and Balbir Singh have handed over the amount in question for purchase of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he matter. 13(ii) The assessee also pleaded before authorities below that FERA case was framed against the assessee and his son on which also, ld. CIT(Appeals) has given an observation that since matter is under investigation, therefore, such a matter would be decided by the concerned authorities. However, on going through the statement of the assessee recorded on 29.10.2005, i.e. after seizure of the cash by the police, copy of the statement is filed at page 44 of the Paper Book, would reveal that it is not clarified as to under what circumstances and under which provision of the Act, such statement of the assessee has been recorded. It is a well settled law that in criminal proceedings, the cases shall have to be decided on the basis of the evidences produced by the prosecution and the prosecution shall have to prove the case against the accused beyond doubt. However, in the Income Tax proceedings, matters shall be decided on the basis of the evidences and material on record in the light of principle of prepondence of probabilities. The ld. counsel for the assessee relied upon following decisions: i) Judgement of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of it ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of appeal of the assessee is allowed. 15. As regards the credit in the name of Shri Gurdiwan Singh in a sum of Rs. 10 lacs, his statement was recorded at assessment stage by Assessing Officer, copy of which is filed at page 53 of the Paper Book in which he has categorically denied to have given any loan to the assessee. He has explained that he has not taken any loan or given any loan for the last six years. He has given about Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- of loan to his brother and sister. Since Shri Gurdiwan Singh was witness of the assessee who has deposed against the assessee, therefore, assessee failed to prove the source of the credit and genuineness of the transaction in the matter. The ld. counsel for the assessee, however, submitted that subsequent to the statement recorded on 06.11.2008, Shri Gurdiwan Singh filed his affidavit before ld. CIT(Appeals) on 16.05.2009 confirming giving of loan to the assessee. Such an affidavit filed at the subsequent stage without making retraction to the earlier statement given to Assessing Officer would not serve any purpose. Further affidavit of Shri Gurdiwan Singh has not been supported by any evidence or material on record, therefore....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rther noted that land was sold by Shri Pritam Singh in August,2004 and the cash amount was given to the assessee in September,2005. The Assessing Officer did not believe that cash amount can be kept by Shri Pritam Singh at his house for more than one year. For the reason that cash was seized from the assessee, Assessing Officer observed that assessee has tried to convert the same into the agreement amount in the name of Shri Pritam Singh. The Assessing Officer, accordingly, disallowed the cash credit of Rs. 20 lacs and made addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. 19. The assessee challenged the addition before ld. CIT(Appeals) and written submission is reproduced in the appellate order in which the assessee briefly explained that sum of Rs. 20 lacs was received on account of mortgage of the house from Shri Pritam Singh. Copy of the mortgage agreement was produced by Shri Pritam Singh before Assessing Officer. It was explained that source of advancing the money being the sale proceeds of the agriculture land. Copy of the Power of Attorney alongwith original mortgage deed was filed before Assessing Officer. It was, therefore, explained that initial burden upon assessee to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee produced Shri Pritam Singh before Assessing Officer at assessment stage and his statement has been recorded in which he has confirmed that he is agriculturist and has confirmed to have given Rs. 20 lacs to the assessee in September,2005 after selling the land in August,2004. He has confirmed that he has kept the money at his house after selling the land because he was not having any bank account. He has further explained in his statement that he had sold the land to Shri Darshan Singh, Dhandari, Distt. Ludhiana and thereafter, he has not purchased any land. He has further explained that the amount in question was given to the assessee in the presence of Shri Baljit Singh, Sukhanand and Nachhatar Singh, resident of Saido. He has also explained in his statement that in lieu of the money, assessee has promised to give him kothi. The deal of the kothi was struck for Rs. 25 lacs against which Shri Pritam Singh has given Rs. 20 lacs to the assessee which was recorded on the stamp paper of Rs. 300/-. He has also explained that he knew the assessee for the last 10 to 15 years. He has further explained with regard to the fact that kothi which was proposed to be purchased is in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i Pritam Singh is correct and probable and would not lead to any inference against the assessee. The Assessing Officer has not brought any evidence on record that sale consideration received by Shri Pritam Singh was used somewhere else for purchase of any other property. Shri Pritam Singh in his statement had also confirmed that after selling the land, he has not purchased any land except the amount in question handed over to the assessee through Mortgage Agreement. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, did not make any further enquiry to impeach the statement of Shri Pritam Singh. It is, therefore, clear that statement of Shri Pritam Singh is corroborated by the evidences and material on record and proves that he has handed over Rs. 20 lacs to the assessee. The decisions of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the cases of Ramanjit Singh (supra), Laul Transport Corporation (supra) and Shri Ram Narain Goel (supra) clearly support the explanation of the assessee of proving genuine credit in the matter. Thus, the assessee is able to prove identity of the creditor, his credit worthiness and genuineness of the transaction in the matter. The initial onus upon assessee to prove the ab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the authorities below. Since the expenses were not subjected to verification and no log-book or details have been maintained and ld. counsel for the assessee submitted before ld. CIT(Appeals) that non-business use of vehicles cannot be ruled out, would clearly support the findings of authorities below that these expenses were not subject to verification and were not supported by the vouchers. The disallowance was, therefore, justified. This ground is accordingly dismissed. 24. On ground No. 5, assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 20,000/- on account of household withdrawals. The assessee has shown household withdrawals of Rs. 80,000/- to support the family of four members. The Assessing Officer, therefore, estimated household expenditure in a sum of Rs. 1 lac and made deduction of Rs. 20,000/-. No specific arguments were made before ld. CIT(Appeals), therefore, ld. CIT(Appeals) considering the return of income filed by assessee at Rs. 3,21,460/- confirmed the addition and dismissed this ground of appeal of the assessee. 25. On consideration of the rival submissions, we do not find any merit in this ground of appeal of the assessee. The assessee has failed to produce ....