AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 91
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e for AY 2012-13 on 17.09.2012 declaring a total income of Rs. 9,68,017/-. There was a search and survey action in the case of M/s Evergreen Enterprises and during the course of search, statement from one the partners Shri Nilesh Bharana was recorded under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). Based on the material seized and the statement recorded an information was received by the assessee's AO that a cash loan of Rs. 21,50,000/- given by the assessee as detailed below - Amount Code Name F.Y. Name Contact person PAN Full Name 450 P/38/P Given B.B 05.05.2011 Parag Parag Savla AGLPS7769R Shri Parag Motilal Savla 500 P/38/P Given B.B 05.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he codes used by Shri Nilesh Bharani Partner of M/s Evergreen Enterprises for recording the transactions have been properly explained in his statements which clearly point out that Shri Parag Motilal Savla was the contact person who has dealt with Shri Nilesh Bharani, Partner of M/s Evergreen Enterprises, for these cash transactions. 20. The genuineness of such unaccounted cash transactions cannot be ignored in the face of conclusive documentary evidences gathered first hand through search action to prove the same. Hence, the entire amount of cash loans of Rs. 21,50,000/- are added back to the income as unexplained money u/s 69A of the IT Act, 1961. As the assessee has deliberately concealed the particulars of his income penalty pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be pressed in case the appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee on merits. Therefore we will first consider the issue on merits contended through Ground No.3 above. 6. The ld AR submitted that there is nothing incriminating the assessee found in the seized materials to support the allegation that the assessee has given cash loans. In this regard the ld AR drew our attention to the seized materials in page 14 and 15 of paper book containing coded certain entries. The ld AR further submitted that even in the statement recorded from the accountant of M/S. Evergreen Enterprises, there is no mention of assessee's name and what was explained was details of how the entries found in the seized documents need to be decoded. The ld AR in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d materials and therefore the claim that the addition is made without any basis is not correct. Accordingly the ld DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. There was a search and seizure operations in M/s. Evergreen Enterprises and during the course of search certain documents were seized and statements were recorded. In the documents seized there were entries in a certain format and in the statement recorded the accountant has explained the way in which the entries were to be read. The AO based on the above information was of the view that the entries as tabulated in the earlier part of this order pertains to the cash loans given by the assessee to Shri Nilesh Bharani ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....terial other than what is shared with the assessee have been used to aid the interpretation. We further notice that other than decoding the entries as pertaining to the assessee the AO has not brought any other material on record to substantiate that the assessee has given the cash loans to Shri Nilesh Bharani. We also notice that the assessee has furnished the audited financial statements for the year ended 31.03.2012 before the AO during assessment proceedings and that the AO has not recorded any adverse findings with regard to the same. From the perusal of the findings of the CIT(A), we notice that the CIT(A) has not gone into the merits of the issue and has merely confirmed the addition relying on AO's findings. In this regard, it i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... v) F.Y. 2011-12 10. It is an admitted fact that the Assessing Officer has not entertained the Assessee's request for cross examination of Shri Nilesh Bharani / M/s Evergreen Enterprises and also it is a fact that Shri Nilesh Bharani subsequently retracted his statement. Therefore, his statement made earlier become doubtful as claimed by the Assessee and cannot be relied as substantive evidence. Even otherwise, we have failed to understand that how the name as mentioned in the said diary, as 'NENSIBHI ELLA' can be attributed to the Assessee's name. Further, how the coded amount of Rs. 32,500 can be construed as Rs. 3,25,000,00/-. Further, how the Assessee is connected with the said narration of entries written in diary. Fu....