2012 (5) TMI 819

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm having three partners, namely, Sri Naresh Agarwal, Shri Harsh Agarwal and Shri S.B. Patel. During the year under consideration, Shri Naresh Agarwal, one of the partners, has introduced fresh capital of Rs. 45,45,000/- in the assessee firm, out of which a sum of Rs. 17,75,000/- has been deposited by him in cash on various dates. The AO treated the same to be unexplained. Shri Naresh Agarwal was examined u/s. 131 of the IT Act on oath and according to the AO, he could not explain the source of the capital introduced in cash satisfactorily. Therefore, the capital introduced in cash was added to the income of the assessee, which was introduced on several dates as noted in the appellate or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....submitted cash flow statement of Mr. Naresh Agarwal for the month of Nov. and Dec. 2006 alongwith his bank statement in support of its submissions. The bank account of Mr. Naresh Agarwal in UTI Bank, Gwalior shows that upto 05/12/2006 he was having credit balance of Rs. 3,412/- only. Deposits of Rs. 60,000/- and Rs. 40,000/- made on 6/12/2006 have been withdrawn on the same day itself vide cheque No. 133061 for Rs. 100,000/- which has been paid to M/s. MGR Automobiles and not to the appellant firm. Earlier submission of the appellant that withdrawal of Rs. 4,00,000/- made on 6/11/2006 covers the said deposit of Rs. 1,25,000/- on 6/12/2006 is also not correct as the said withdrawal was deposited on 15/11/2006 itself. Cash flow statement of S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t be treated to be the income of the firm for the purpose of income tax. By relying on decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in case of Sundar Lal Jain vs. CIT (1979) 117 ITR 316, it has been held that the credit in the account of a partner is not a loan to the firm and is not assessable in the hands of the firm. It is open to the AO to undertake further investigation with regard to that individual who has deposited this amount. So far as the responsibility of the appellant firm is concerned, it is satisfactorily discharged. Respectfully following these decisions, addition of Rs. 17,75,000/- made in the case of the appellant firm on account of capital contribution by one of its partners, whose statement has also been recorded by the AO d....