TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (8) TMI 276
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oan raised from Sh. Anil Kumar." 2. As regards grounds No. 1 relating to the action of learned CIT(A) in deleting addition of Rs. 50,000 made by the AO on account of alleged non-genuine loan raised by the assessee from Sh. Pawan Kumar, learned first appellate authority has discussed this issue in paras 3-3.3 of the impugned order as under. "3. Ground No. 2 is reg. additions totalling Rs. 2.15 lac on account of cash credit of Rs. 50,000 in the name of Sh. Pawan Kumar, Rs. 25,000 in the name of Sh. Jatinder Kumar, Rs. 50,000 in the name of Sh. Sanjiv Kumar, Rs. 40,000 in the name of Sh. Anil Kumar and Rs. 25,000 in the name of Sh. Amrik Singh. Each of them are discussed hereunder separately: 3.1 Sh. Pawan Kumar Bansal—Rs. 50,000 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....991. The cheque was issued in favour of the appellant-firm on 10th July, 1992. The statement of Shri Pawan Kumar was recorded and also copy of bank account was produced. The credits were duly explained. Since the appellant had proved the identity of the creditor, his capacity to advance the loan and genuineness of the transaction, treating the credit as unexplained was not justified especially when the creditor is an assessee in the same ward. 3.3. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and also made reference to the assessment records. It is observed that statement of Shri Pawan Kumar was recorded by the AO and he confirmed having advanced the loan. The AO required Shri Pawan Kumar to explain certain credit entries in his acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as made out of this account on 10th July, 1991. There is no other deposit before this date. In this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that initial onus to explain the source of credit in the name of Shri Pawan Kumar Bansal to the extent of Rs. 50,000 stood discharged by the appellant. No material has been brought on record by the AO to controvert the explanation given which is duly supported by the statement of Shri Pawan Kumar Bansal, its copy of bank account and further explanation regarding the deposits, etc. Therefore, addition of Rs. 50,000 made on this account is held to be not justified and is deleted." After hearing the parties to the dispute, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the reasoning and conclusion of l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Therefore, holding that Shri Anil Kumar was in a position to advance only a sum of Rs. 10,000 out of his past savings, the source of remaining credit of Rs. 40,000 was treated as not explained. 3.14 The counsel of the appellant submitted that the loan was advanced by the creditor through crossed cheque. The source of Rs. 20,000 was stated to be received form M/s Anil Trading Co. through cheque on 2nd July, 1991, to whom this sum had been advanced as loan on 17th April, 1991, out of bank account No. 14817. Similarly, Rs. 18,000 was received back from M/s Diwan Enterprises which was advanced as loan to the said firm in immediately preceding year through cheque from saving bank account. Copy of account in the books of M/s Anil Trading Co.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... did not bring any material on record to controvert or prove the explanation to be not correct. Therefore, there was no justification in treating the credit to the extent of Rs. 40,000 as not explained. With these observations, the addition of Rs. 40,000 made on this account is held to be not justified and is deleted." After hearing the parties to the dispute, here also I do not find any justification in interfering with the reasoning and conclusion of learned first appellate authority. Here also, Sh. Anil Kumar creditor is an existing assessee with ITO, Ward-6, and he has admitted having given loan to the assessee by account payee cheque drawn from his SB a/c No. 14817 with the Haryana State Coop Bank. In fact, loan advance by Sh. Anil ....