TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 2003
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the assessee, submitted that the assessee paid Rs. 46,50,000/- as advance towards installation of pollution control plant during the assessment year 2002-03 through cheque to one Shri S.K. Pandian, out of borrowed funds from HDFC and M/s Sree Gokulam Chit. According to the Ld. counsel, ultimately, the pollution control plant could not be installed, therefore, the said Shri S.K. Pandian returned Rs. 46,50,000/- by cash during the year under consideration. According to the Ld. counsel, the amount received from Shri S.K. Pandian was deposited in the bank account. Referring to page 9 of the paper-book, the Ld.counsel submitted that Shri S.K. Pandian confirmed that he received Rs. 46,50,000/- from the assessee through cheque and by cash. 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the CIT(Appeals) has rightly confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The assessee claims that he advanced a sum of Rs. 46,50,000/- for purchase and installation of pollution control plant during the assessment year 2008-09. The fact remains that the cheque said to be issued by the assessee was a cash cheque and money was withdrawn on the same day. Therefore, it is not known how Shri S.K. Pandian was able to return the amount in cash as claimed by the assessee. In the absence of any details, the confirmation letter which is now available at page 9, is only an afterthought. When the assessee claimed before the Asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ution control plant. The same claim was made with regard to Rs. 46,50,000/-. The said Shri Nagarajan was examined by the Assessing Officer on 29.12.2011. He admitted before the Assessing Officer that he is only acting as real estate agent for brokerage. Even though the said Shri Nagarajan claimed before the Assessing Officer during the course of examination that the money said to be received from the assessee was advanced to one proprietor of dying unit at Erode, he could not produce any evidence. For making any advance to the dying unit at Erode as claimed, there was no evidence for the claim of Shri Nagarajan that he received back from the Erode party. The said Shri Nagarajan also claimed that what was received from the assessee is only b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the assessee received a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- from one Shri D. Palanisamy. According to the Ld. counsel, the assessee has filed only cash book before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(Appeals). The Ld.counsel has also submitted that cash book disclosing the fact of receipt of Rs. 6,00,000/- from Shri D. Palanisamy is an evidence, therefore, the CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition. 12. On the contrary, Shri B. Sagadevan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee claimed before the Assessing Officer that he received Rs. 6,00,000/- from Shri D. Palanisamy in three equal instalments. According to the Ld. D.R., the identity of Shri Palanisamy was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lso tax receipts for payment of taxes to Nallur Municipality. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 16. On the contrary, Shri B. Sagadevan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee claimed that a property was purchased at 30B, Amarjothi AS Nagar, 2nd Street, Nallur, Tirupur in the name of his wife. In respect of very same property, according to the Ld. D.R., the assessee's wife claimed exemption under Section 54F of the Act which was allowed by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., it is not known how the assessee was able to invest again in the property in which the assessee's wife invested her own ....