TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 1153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... same can be disposed of at this stage itself. Consequently, notice is made returnable forthwith and by consent of the parties, appeal is taken up for final disposal. 3. This Appeal has been preferred by the assessee under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, assailing the legality and correctness of the order dated 11.05.2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench "G", Mumbai (Tribunal) in Income Tax Appeal No. 6160/Mum/2016 for the assessment year 2010-11. 4. Short point for consideration in this Appeal is the addition of a sum of Rs. 14 lakhs to the income of the assessee by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (briefly, "the Act" hereinafter), as modified by the Tribunal. 5....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said amount was full of doubts and explanation provided by the assessee could not be accepted. Accordingly addition of Rs. 14 lakhs was upheld while deleting the addition of Rs. 3 lakhs vide the order dated 11.05.2017. 8. Aggrieved, present appeal has been preferred. 9. Though a number of questions have been proposed by the Appellant as substantial questions of law, we find that the following question covers the controversy in question, which is as under : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the addition in respect of unsecured loan of Rs. 14,00,000/- under section 68 of the Act, inspite of the fact that the initial onus laid down on the Appellant was duly d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....turn." 11.1. Similarly in respect of Smt. Sarojini Thakur, result of verification and remarks by the Department is as under : "This donor has ostensibly retired from service in 2007 and she has deposited cash of Rs. 9,00,000/- in her bank with SBI, Rae Baraeli on 18.07.2009 before issuing two cheques to Savitri Thakur. She has not filed any return of income admittedly from A.Y. 2008-09. She also claims to receive agricultural income of Rs. 1.5 lacs p.a. which is claimed to be kept in cash with her since several years." 12. At this stage, it would be apposite to advert to section 68 of the Act, relevant portion of which reads as under : "68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ower Pvt. Ltd., (2018) 403 ITR 415 (Bom), this court has held that assessee is only required to explain the source of the credit. There is no requirement under the law to explain the source of the source. In the instant case, there is no dispute as to the identity of the creditor. There is also no dispute about the genuineness of the transaction. That apart, the creditor has explained as to how the credit was given to the assessee. Thus assessee had discharged the onus which was on him as per the requirement of section 68 of the Act. What the Assessing Officer held was that sources of the source were suspect i.e., he suspected the two sources Shri Rajendra Bahadur Singh and Smt. Sarojini Thakur of the source Smt. Savitri Thakur. 15. In v....