TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (7) TMI 268
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cured creditors but did not produce supporting evidence. In the course of further proceedings, the assessee-filed affidavits of some persons in support of unsecured loans on 25th March, 1996. The AO did not accept affidavits or letters of confirmation allegedly filed on behalf of the creditors and treated the following' cash credits as assessee's income from undisclosed sources. This-way, he made addition of Rs. 95,000 to the income of the assessee: ----------------------------------------------- "S.No. Name of person Amount (Rs.) ----------------------------------------------- 1. Sh. Suba Singh ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n given. (iii) No person is assessed to income-tax. (iv) All the loans have been taken in cash. (v) All the loans have been squared up during the year. (vi) No exact source as to whether the amount was withdrawn from any bank account or any other source has been given. It is also pertinent to point but here that none of the above persons appears to be a man of means as they are doing mainly the brokerage of animals, part time accounting or labour jobs. It also does not stand to reasons as to why such persons would give a loan to the assessee without interest, specially when they are not apparently having any direct connection with him.Therefore, in view of the facts stated above, neither the capacity of the above persons nor ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nto account the decisions in the cases of Orient Trading Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 723 (Bom), Sarogi Credit Corporation vs. CIT 1975 CTR (Pat) 1 : (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Pat) and of CIT vs. Daulatram Rawatmull 1972 CTR (SC) 411 : (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC) held that the assessee had prima facie proved the cash credit transactions. He established identity of creditor and his capacity to advance the money. The genuineness of transaction was also proved. He accordingly treated the cash credits as proved except that of Sh. Laxman Singh. This way, the learned CIT(A) deleted addition of Rs. 80,000 out of Rs. 95,000 added by the AO. 5. The Revenue has brought the issue in appeal. The learned Departmental Representative referred to the affidavits ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....That the source of above deposit was saving in brokerage income. Sd/- (Subhash Jain) Deponent Verification: I, the abovenamed further verify that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and no part of it is false. Sd/- (Subhash Jain) Deponent" 6.1 The affidavit of Sh. Mangla is to the following effect: "AFFIDAVIT I, Mangla Ram S/o Mula Ram, aged about 45 years, resident of Village Gudokalan, Distt. Sikar, solemnly affirm and declare as under: (1) That I made a temporary deposit of Rs. 12,000 on 21st April, 1992, with M/s Jagan Nath Amrit Lal, Sirsa. (2) That the source of deposit was saving made by me and my other companions while working the labour jobs. (3) That the said....