TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (3) TMI 98
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeal has been admitted on the ground that the following three questions raised by the Revenue arise for consideration: "(1) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the addition of Rs. 63,351 made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained peak difference of investment over income under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961? (2) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,50,606 made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained investment in purchase of foreign currency, under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961? (3) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 80,000 made by the Assessi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... mentioning the nature of business. The said return was filed during the days when the search was going on and, therefore, declaration of the said income was not bona fide. Further, the said income shown as from lottery and from advising chance numbers to others (relating to lottery) could not be believed, as lottery income is invariably received by cheques, whereas the assessee had shown income by cash, and also on the ground that the assessee did not have the skill or the background of advising the chance numbers to others. Therefore, the Assessing Officer prepared a revised cash flow statement showing Rs. 1,36,857 as sources of cash (cash receipts) and Rs. 2,00,528 as the application of cash (cash expenditure), which left a deficit of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed March 25, 1997, cancelled the addition on the following reasoning: "8. After considering the submissions of the learned Authorised Representative and after perusing the case records, the following decisions are given- (a) Regarding opening balance of Rs. 16,906 as on April 1, 1991, it is seen that last year's assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Income-tax Act and the appellant had submitted the combined cash flow statement of various years in which the closing balance as on March 31, 1991, was shown at Rs. 16,906. The Assessing Officer after considering the facts of the case has dropped the proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1991-92 on February 8, 1994, with the approval of D.C.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estion No. (2): This relates to deletion of Rs. 1,50,606 added by the Assessing Officer as unexplained investment in purchase of foreign currency. The same question has been considered by us and answered in the affirmative against the Revenue in MA (IT) No. 69 of 2003 decided on March 2, 2005- CIT v. Savitri Devi Shukla (No. 2) [2008] 296 ITR 737 (MP)- relating to the same assessment year in the case of assessee's mother Smt. Savitri Devi Shukla. For the reasons stated therein, we answer the second question in the affirmative, against the Revenue. Re: Question No. (3): The Assessing Officer had added Rs. 80,000 under section 68 of the Act on account of following three unexplained loans received by the assessee from Biharilal (Rs. 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... creditors to verify the claim of the assessee and as the Assessing Officer failed to issue summons to the creditors for verification of the claim, the addition was not justified and the appellate authority could not have plugged the lapse on the part of the Assessing Officer by remanding the matter. The said finding is challenged by the Revenue in this appeal. It is now well-settled that in regard to any sum credited in the books of account, the assessee should establish three things: the identity of the creditor, the capacity of the creditor, and the genuineness of the transaction. It is for the assessee to adduce the evidence establishing the said three factors. In this case, the record disclosed that the assessee did not examine the ....