TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 1724
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessing authority ; 2) the assessing authority has erred in making addition of Rs. 2 lac in respect of loan received from Smt. Sita Devi u/s 68 of the Act inspite of the fact that relevant documents and proof were filed and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition; and 3) the assessing authority has erred in making an addition of Rs. 2 lac u/s 68 of the Act in respect of gifts received from Smt. Saraswati Devi. 2. In support of ground No. 1 the Ld. AR submitted that merely on the basis of the information received from the investigation wing of the department that the assessee had taken accommodation entry of Rs. 2 lac each from Smt. Saraswati Devi, and Smt. Sita Devi without supported by any tangible material, the AO had initiat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of accounts of the assessee. In support he placed reliance on the following decisions : ITO vs. Kamal Kumar Mishra 143 ITD 686 (Lucknow) Anand Ram Raitani. v. Commissioner of Income Tax. 223 ITR 544 (Gawahati) Smt. Shanta Devi. v. Commissioner of Income Tax.171 ITR 532 (P & H) 4. In support of ground No. 2 & 3 on merits of the additions, the Ld. AR submitted that the AO had made the addition u/s 68 of Rs. 2 lac received as a loan from Smt. Sita Devi and Rs. 2 lac received as a gift from Smt. Saraswati Devi treating them as accommodation entries without verifying the correctness of the documents filed by the assessee in support of the genuineness of these claims. He submitted that the assessee had furnished foll....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had been made available at page No. 8 to 24 of the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. The Ld. AR submitted further that the donor Smt. Saraswati Devi is assessed to tax. Under these circumstances the AO without examining the authenticity of the documents filed by the assessee before him has wrongly made addition of Rs. 4 lacs u/s 68 of the Act merely on the surmises that the claimed loan and gift are accommodation entries. In support he placed reliance on the following decisions :- Nathu Ram Prem Chand. V. CIT. 49 ITR 561 CIT vs. Orissa Corporation PVt. Ltd. 159 ITR 78 (SC) Smt. Jaswinder Kaur vs. ITO (supra) Smt. Neeraj Goyal vs. ITO (supra) 6. In opposition to the above submission of the Ld. AR in support of groun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 148 of the Act. The AO in the present case has initiated the reopening proceedings solely based upon the information received from DIT (Investigation) that the assessee has taken an entry of Rs. 2 lac from Mrs. Saraswati Devi through a cheque dated 4.3.2002 drawn on Jai Luxmi Co-operative Bank Ltd. Delhi - 110 006 and Rs. 2,00,00/- from Mrs. Sita Devi through a cheque dated 7.2.2002 drawn on Jai Luxmi Cooperative Bank Ltd., Fatehpuri Delhi 110 006 after paying cash of Rs. 4,08,000/- (including commission of Rs. 8000/-) and the said cheques were found credited in her bank account with Indian Overseas Bank, Punjabi Bagh. The AO did not bother himself to inquire this information to form a belief that some taxable income has escaped assessment....