AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 827
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat revenue's instant appeal suffers from 5 days delay in filing. To this effect, the AO filed petition for condonation of the said delay stated therein that due to the case record pertaining to this appeal mixed up with other records of this office could not be traced immediately, which caused the impugned delay in filing of the instant appeal. Case law Collector Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji & Ors, 1987 AIR 1353 (SC) and University of Delhi Vs. Union of India, Civil Appeal No. 9488 & 9489/2019 dated 17 December, 2019, hold that such a delay; supported by cogent reasons, deserves to be condoned so as to make way for the cause of substantial justice. We accordingly hold that assessee's impugned delay of 5 days is neither intentional nor d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....have helped him financially. The assessee also could not produce any of the purported lenders despite multiple opportunities having been provided to him. The above ground contentions of the assessee do not hold ground .. It is pertinent to mention here that the assessee has booked the entire amount as his own capital in the ITR furnished by him. Further, the assessee has also submitted a balance sheet of the assessee wherein it is also indicated that an amount of Rs. 2, 84, 64, 000/ - was ( capital brought in'. Thus, it 'is clear that the assessee on multiple occasions has clearly intended to treat the sum received as his own capital. Further, a perusal of point No.12 of the lease agreement with Secunderabad Contonment Boar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....39;s claim that multiple persons have provided him money to pay towards the charges of Secunderabad Cantonment Board is not sustained. Further, apart from the clear deviations from the submissions of the assessee noted above, it is clear that the amount has been booked by the assessee as his own capital and not as his loan or any other form of advance. The money is to be treated as capital received by the assessee in every regard and to be brought to tax in assessee's hands only. Thus, an amount of Rs. 2,72,19,261/- representing an increase in capital compared to capital shown as per AY 2014-15 is to be treated as assessee's income as unexplained credit and is to be brought to tax u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961." 4. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gate business of Rs. 47,65,576/- also to be given credit. After verification of the same, since the appellant disclosed this profit hence capital to this extent to be treated as explained. Hence, addition to this extent deleted. With regard to Rs. 50 lakhs in DDs received by the appellant, the Assessing Officer, in his Assessment Order itself mentioned that this is received from Mr.Kameswara Rao and as per submissions of appellant and bank account also, these DDs along with another amount of Rs. 95 lakhs invested in FDs received from Mr.Kameswara Rao. The bank account along' with details and identity of Mr.Kameswara Rao was. already filed by the appellant. Therefore, this identity was proved and hence the Assessing officer made....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved from friends and relatives has been credited to the capital account and capital has been increased. He submitted that it was primary duty cast upon the assessee to prove the conditions laid down u/s 68 as under: "Identity of his creditors, Capacity of creditors to advance money; and Genuineness of transaction." 7. The ld. AR on the other hand relied on the order of the CIT(A) and reiterated the submissions as made before the lower authorities. He submitted that all the details were produced to the satisfaction of the AO at the time of assessment proceedings. He submitted that the amounts were directly credited into the bank account of the assessee. He submitted that the CIT(A) has decided the issue in favour of the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to submit a bank guarantee." 8.1 From the submissions itself, it is clear that the assessee has received an amount of Rs. 2,84,64,000/- from friends and relatives and these facts have been ignored by the CIT(A). There is no doubt that the amount has come into assessee's bank account through banking channel, but, the other conditions like identity of the creditors/depositors and creditworthiness of the creditors has not been verified by the CIT(A) and no documents have been filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) as well as before the AO to prove the conditions laid down in section 68. The CIT(A) has ignored all these issues. We have also gone through the bank statements filed by the assessee, on multiple occasions huge amounts were depo....