TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1165
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent of loan is not justified. 2. "On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of loss from the sale of liquor of Rs. 4,03,321/- being destroyed due to repair work. Since liquor amounting to Rs. 3.4 Lacs was the sale of the assessee and therefore assessee won't stock up liquor of Rs. 4 Lacs in one go. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case the order of Ld. CIT(A) is perverse." 4. "The appellant craves, leave or reserving the right to amend modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee filed return of income declaring the total loss of Rs. 66,09,497/- for Assessment Year 2011-12. The case of the Assessee was selected for scrutiny and an assessment order came to be passed u/s 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) on 31/03/2014by making addition of Rs. 3,13,37,238/- u/s 68 of the Act and also disallowed sale of liquor of Rs. 4,03,321/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 31/03/2014, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order date....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovided the bank statements and details of income of Smt. NeerjaGhura as per ITRs for the AYs 2006-07 is Rs. 32,79,765/-, 2007-08 is Rs. 11,74,813/-, 2008-09 is Rs. 4,49,969/-, 2009-10 is Rs. 22,29,450/-, 2010-11 is Rs. 16,12,135/-. The copy of the account of Smt. NeerjaGhura is as under:- Date Particulars Vch Type Debit Credit 1-4-2010 Dr. Opening Balance 1,70,18,238.01 30-04-2010 Dr. The K V B Ltd. Receipt 4,75,000.00 06-05-2010 Dr. The K V B Ltd. Receipt 5,40,000.00 07-05-2010 Dr. The K V B Ltd. Receipt 7,00,000.00 21-05-2010 Dr. The K V B Ltd. Receipt 13,00,000.00 28-10-2010 Dr. The K V B Ltd. Receipt 20,000.00 26-03-2011 Cr. The KVB Ltd. Payment 50,00,000.00 30-03-2011 Cr. The K V B Ltd. Payment 1,00,000.00 51,00,000.00 2,00,53,238.01 Cr. Closing Balance 1,49,53,238.01 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The KVB Ltd. Payment 31,00,000.00 1,44,08,500.00 2,03,72,300.00 Cr. Closing Balance 59,63,800.00 2,03,72,300.00 2,03,72,300.00 4.6 It is noted from the copy of account that the amounts were received in her account in by cheques of KarurVysya Bank referred to as M/s KVB Ltd in the above copy of account by the appellant. A sum of Rs. 1.65,00,000/- was transferred from her account to the appellant by cheque of KarurVysya Bank. There were subsequent transactions of receipt and payment by cheque from M/s KVB Ltd in her account. The appellant claims that the provisions of section 68, applies on the basis of credit entries and not on the basis of difference of closing and opening balances. Further, the appellant has submitted detail of source as well as source of source with respect to the credit rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; 2,82,09,293.23 2,82,09,293.23 * The A.O. accepted the credits made in the accounts, but, it appears has added the difference between closing balance and opening balance. Closing Balance Rs. 2,27,09,293/- Opening Balance Rs. 95,56,793/- Difference Rs. 1,31,52,500 Thus, while in case of MsNeerjaGhura, entire closing balance was added, here the difference between opening and closing balance was added as in case of Sh. Gurdip Singh. It will be seen from the copy of account that the amounts were transferred from his bank account in KarurVysya Bank, referred to as M/s KVB Ltd in the copy of account filed. Total amount of Rs. 1.47,15,000/- was transferred from his account to the appellant by cheques of the KarurVysya Bank on various dates between 22.04.2010 to 14.02.2011. There were other transactions of receipt by cheque from his bank account in KarurVysya Bank (M/s KVB Ltd). The appellant claims that all the entries were properly explained before the AO and the credit entries have been considered as unexplained. The amounts were received from cheques of KarurVysya Bank. Further, the appellant ha....