TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (9) TMI 622
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... including jurisdictional High Court. 2. Because the Ld. CIT(A) was wholly unjustified in examining source of source. The examination of source of source in respect of deposit, particularly from partners, is contrary to authoritative judicial pronouncements. 3. Because the order is against the law & facts. 4. Because the appellant craves leave to alter/ modify grounds before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. 2. In the present case, return of income for the A.Y. 2009-10 was filed on 29.09.2009 declaring total income of Rs. 4,86,270/-. Subsequently, the case was taken up for scrutiny under CASS and the assessment was completed at a total income of Rs. 1,01,55,498/-. In the process of making additions, the AO disallowed a sum of Rs. 92,00,000/- unexplained capital of the partner of the firm and that in the assessment order the appellant conceded for the addition. The AO also disallowed interest of Rs. 2,85,984/- and Rs. 1,83,248/- for which, it was stated that the authorized representative of the assessee conceded. 3. In the first round of appeal, ITAT, Agra Bench, Agra Vide ITA No. 189/Agra/2011 dated 12.08.2015 has restored the matter back to AO holding that since the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... counsel of the assessee has accepted that these are unaccounted income in the hands of the assessee but it was held that the confession of the counsel of the assessee is not valid in law and the case has been set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer. 5.5 In this connection, in the case of Venus Auto which is a sister company of the assessee, it is seen that in the A.Y. 2009-10 that is the same assessment year the transactions that were explained by the assessee before the AO were that the M/s Venus Auto has transferred Rs. 62,00,000/- to M/S Krishna Bulk Movers (P) Ltd. and thereafter M/s Krishna Bulk Movers (P) Ltd. has transferred this amount to M/s Verma Service Station (P) Ltd. Copy of all these accounts were available in the case of Venus Auto and hence, assessee's contention that this amount has now come from some advance for land sold seems to be after thought not supported by any documentary evidence. Under these circumstances, AO is correct in holding these credits as unexplained in the hands of the assessee. 5.6 In the context of cash deposits in the bank account, when the Assessing Officer starts enquiry, specifically to satisfy himself of the source of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....editors the genuineness of the transactions, and the creditworthiness of his creditors vis-a-vis the transactions which he had with the creditors, his burden stands discharged and the burden then shifts to the revenue to show that though covered by cheques, the amounts in question, actually belonged to, or was owned by the assessee himself. Even the particulars from assessment records, where the creditor is assessed, may not be sufficient as observed in CIT vs. Korlay Trading Co., Ltd. (1998) 238 ITR 820 (Cal). Further, in the case of Kamal Motors v. CIT [2003] 131 Taxman 155 (Raj.). It was held that the responsibility is on the assessee to discharge the onus that the cash creditor is a man of means to allow the cash credit. The burden to prove the source of receipt is in respect of each entry as held in the case of CIT v. R.S. Rathore [1995] 212 ITR 390 (Raj.), that while explaining the various credits and investments, it is possible that the assessee may be successful in explaining some of them, but that does not by itself mean that the entire investments has to be considered as explained. It is each and individual entry on which the mind has to be applied by the taxing author....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....accounts of lenders for purpose of giving credits to assessee and entries were only accommodation entries and as such, could not be considered as genuine transactions. As discussed in the foregoing paragraphs, it is held in a number of case laws that if any sum is found credited in the bank accounts or in the books of accounts of the assessee, the onus to prove the nature and source of such deposits with supporting documentary evidence is on the assesses. 5.7 In this case initially when assessee could not explain the nature and source of these cash deposits, the counsel of the assessee has accepted in the first round of the assessment that this is unaccounted income of the assessee. Thereafter he explained that it is by sale of lands in the hands of the partners, but could not produce ant documentary evidence to that effect. It is noted that in the case of M/s Venus Auto, assessee has himself mentioned it as amount from M/s Krishna Bulk Movers (P) Ltd., who has transferred this amount to M/s Verma Service Station (P) Ltd. Thus apsessee is changing his explanation at different places. In spite of AO issuing summons to partners, they did not attend to show the real nature of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent DR placed heavy reliance on the impugned order. He has drawn our attention to APB page no. 4, 7, and 9 the return of income, balance sheet and ledger account of M/s Verma service station in the books of Sh. Naveen Chandra Verma partner of the firm emphasizing that though he has meagre income of Rs. 4,21,280/- and opening balance with Rs. 1,00,000/- to deposit in the firm as on 01.04.2008 and further payment of Rs. 50,00,000/- to the credit of following accounts as on 06.05.2008has been made detailed as under: Debit Credit Verma Service Station Rs. 50,00,000/- 06.05.2008 Ch. No. 258042, From Rama Rama Rs. 8 lacs Hara Hara Rs. 12, lacs KrashnaKrashna Rs. 10 lacs Venus Automative Services Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 10 lacs Verma Service Station Pvt. Rs. 10 lacs The ld. DR contended that Sh. Naveen Chandra Verma has meagre income as per income return is only from interest on ostensible deposits in the firm is to be held unexplained. 7.1 The ld. DR while referring to the copy of balance sheet APB page no. 7, pointed out that assessee has shown an agricultural land for Rs. 10,07,560/- as per sale deed shown on the asset side of the balance sheet whereas he has shown advances sale of lan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions by ITAT, Agra Bench noted that during the year Sh. Naveen Chandra Verma and Smt. Bharti Verma partner of the firm have cash deposited worth Rs. 65 lacs and Rs. 27 lacs respectively with the appellant assessee M/s Verma Service Station, Firozabad. The AO has made addition of said deposit made by both the partners in absence of corroborative documentary evidences to explain the source of deposits excepts self-certified affidavits. 9. The ld. CIT(A) has considered the written reply submitted by the AR of the assessee, self-certified affidavits and copy of ledger accounts produced. The ld. CIT(A) has noted that the assessee has explained that the two partners Sh. Naveen Chandra Verma and Smt. Bharti Verma have deposited Rs. 65 lacs and Rs. 27 lacs in cash out of the cash receipts against advanced sale of land in individual hence however, the assessee could not furnish any details evidence of holding of land, agreement with the purchasers and date/mode of source of receipts either before the AO or before the ld. CIT(A). Moreover, the assessee had made no compliance to the summons issued dated 10,5.2016 for attendance on 18.05.2016 and thereon 14.07.2016 and 23.08.2016. No documen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the ld. AR for the assessee does not apply to the peculiar facts of the present case. The facts involved therein a credits appearing on the very first day of accounting year whereas in the present case the credits have been introduced by the partners during the year being explained by the assessee before the AO that the assessee sister concern M/s Venus Auto has transferred Rs. 62 lacs to M/s Krishna Bulk Movers (P) Ltd. and thereafter M/s Krishna Bulk Movers P. Ltd. has transferred this amount to M/s Verma Service Station P. Ltd. In the first round of proceedings and in the second round proceedings assessee's contention has changed to have received some advanced for land sold was not supported by any documentary evidence except self-certified evident of advance receipts against sale of land which are contrary to the value of the sale of land shown in the balance sheet as above. None of the cases relied by the ld. AR are applicable to the peculiar facts of the case at hands. 12. Whereas cash receipts of Rs. 35,00,000/- and Rs. 33,50,000/- as on 10.04.2008 and 01.11.2008 respectively shown to be receipt as an advanced against the sale of land has not been demonstrated with the co....