TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 1706
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rther confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeals) of Rs. 18,26,730/- as unexplained cash credit, the assessee has preferred the present appeal with the following proposed question of law : "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as on law the Tribunal was right in law in not allowing relief in reference to addition made towards unsecured loans / gifts amounting to Rs. 18,48,730/-? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in not considering the arguments and paper books filed by the Appellant and therefore, it is prayed that the matter should go back to the final fact finding body i.e. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal?" 2. The facts l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIT (Appeals), the assessee was unsuccessful. In the Appeal before the learned Tribunal, the learned Tribunal by the impugned order has also dismissed the said Appeal and hence, the assessee is before this Court. 3. We have heard learned Counsel Mr. Ketan H. Shah appearing on behalf of the assessee. It is vehemently submitted by learned Counsel Mr. Ketan H. Shah that the learned Tribunal has materially erred in dismissing the Appeal without considering the material produced along with the Paper Book which was produced before the learned CIT (Appeals). It is submitted that the learned Tribunal has not properly appreciated the fact that those persons who made the gift have specific confirmations and therefore, the learned Tribunal ought t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idered by the learned Tribunal in detail. On appreciation of evidence, the learned Tribunal has observed in Paragraph 5 as under :- "5. We have gone through the relevant record and impugned order. Appellant received gift of Rs. 17,00,000/- from relatives and Rs. 1,50,400/-borrowings from relative and friends. With regard to the disallowance and addition made of Rs. 17,00,000/- being claimed by the appellant, as gift were received from the following persons. (1) Rs. 5,00,000/- from father in law. (2) Rs. 5,00,000/- from Ashmitaben S. Patel who in turn from her father Shri Karsan Naran Kalariya (3) Rs. 2,50,000/- from his brother Shri Amratlal Ramchanddas Patel. (4) Rs. 4,50,000/- from Ash....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Naran Kaladiya S/o Shri Naran Kaladiya was recorded by the AO u/s. 131 of the I.T. Act at Page No.31 and 32, he stated that he owned 14 Bigha agricultural land and his total crops was 500 Mann (1 Mann = 20 Kg) and 500 mann peanuts produce from agriculture land. We are just fail to understand how this much of land can produce such a huge crop. It is a matter of research for the Agriculture Scientist as well. This statement cannot be relied upon and in support of its contention he has not produced any certificate from the agriculture department and when he was specifically asked whether he has maintaining any record then in reply he stated that he does not have any documentary evidence and moreover he has not maintaining any account of agricu....