ITO, Moga V. Sh. Ravinder Glass House, Ludhiana

ITA 1150/CHANDI/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5378 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 14-12-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S K MUKHI; MRS JYOTI
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI D.K.SRIVASTAVA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1150/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 THE ITO, VS. SHRI RAVINDER PAL SINGH WARD-IV, PROP M/S RAVINDER GLASS HOUSE, MOGA DISTRICT LUDHIANA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. SARITA KUMARI RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.K. MUKHI & MRS JYOTI ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF C IT(A)-II, LUDHIANA DATED 10.9.2009 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2005-06 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) II LUDHIANA HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDI TION OF RS. 11,26,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/ S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD . CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 39 ,411/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON DEPOSITS OF RS. 11,26,000/-. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED CASH DEPOS ITS IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO.3749 WITH BANK OF PUNJAB LTD, JAGROAN, M AINTAINED BY THE 2 ASSESSEE. THE DATE WISE DETAILS OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE SAID SAVINGS ACCOUNT TOTALING RS. 16.92 LAKHS ARE TABULATED AT PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE S OF THE AFORESAID CASH ENTRIES ALONG WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. IN REPLY, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE SAID SAVING BANK ACCO UNT WAS THE MONEY COLLECTED ON BEHALF OF BABA S. BALWINDER SINGH, VIL LAGE SINGHPURA, TEHSIL KHARAR AND IT WAS FURTHER CLAIMED THAT THE MONEY WA S DONATION GIVEN BY THE SANGAT AND LATER ON THE SAID MONEY TOTALING RS. 11,26,000/- WAS RETURNED TO HIM VIDE CHEQUE NOS. 161227 AND 161229 OF RS. 5,13,000 AND RS. 6,13,000/- RESPECTIVELY. THE REST OF THE ENTRI ES WERE CLAIMED TO BE PERTAINING TO THE BUSINESS CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESS EE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPE CT OF THE ENTRIES CONNECTED WITH HIS BUSINESS. IN RESPECT OF MONEY DEPOSITED ON ACCOUNT OF BABA BALWINDER SINGH, AN AFFIDAVIT TO THIS EFFEC T WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE BABA S. BALWINDER SINGH ON VARIOUS DATES BUT IN THE ABSENCE OF HIS PRODUCTION, AS PER THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE GENUINENESS OF THE TR ANSACTIONS REMAINED UNPROVED. THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOW CAUSED AS TO WHY T HE SAID AMOUNT OF RS. 11,26,000/- BE NOT CONSIDERED AS THE CONCEALED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 68 OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE TO THE SHOW CAUSE N OTICE, THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED RECEIPTS OF RS. 4 LACS RECEIV ED IN THE SHAPE OF FOREIGN CURRENCY WHICH WAS CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE CHEQUE OF M/S JANAK GENERAL STORES, MONEY EXCHANGER . THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ENCASHMENT SLIPS DID NOT IND ICATE THE NAME OF THE PERSON OR PASSPORT NUMBER WHO DONATED THE MONEY TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF RS. 4 LACS WAS ALSO FOUND TO BE WANTING. FURTHER STATEMENT OF SHRI JANAK RAJ OF M/S JANAK GENERAL ST ORES WAS RECORDED, IN WHICH HE CONFIRMED TO HAVE CONVERTED FOREIGN CURREN CY IN THE MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2004, AGAINST WHICH A CHEQUE OF RS. 4 LACS WAS ISSUED AND THE 3 BALANCE WAS GIVEN IN CASH. HE FURTHER CLARIFIED TH AT THERE WERE TWO BEARER CHEQUES AMOUNTING TO RS. 4 LACS AND RS. 3,49,784/- AND THERE WAS ONE ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE OF RS. 4 LACS. HE ALSO DEPOS ED IN THE STATEMENT THAT THE FOREIGN CURRENCY WAS IN THE SHAPE OF ENGLA ND POUND AND CANADIAN DOLLARS. THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO RE CORDED IN WHICH AS PER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HE COULD NOT TELL THE EXACT N AMES AND PARTICULARS OF THE PERSONS WHO HAD DONATED THE MONEY. THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER ALSO FOUND THAT THE PAY-IN-SLIP FOR DEPOSITING THE CASH IN THE BANK BORE THE SIGNATURES OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH ESTABLISHES THAT T HE MONEY IN FACT BELONGS TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, S. BALWINDER SING H WAS RESIDING AT FAR FLUNG PLACES FROM JAGRON I.E. NEAR KURALI, TESHIL K HARAR AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER QUESTIONED THE NECESSITY OF DEPOSITING THE MONEY AT JAGROAN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO QUESTIONED WHY THE AMOUNT WA S NOT DEPOSITED IN THE ACCOUNT OF GURDWARA COMMITTEE AT VILLAGE SINGHP URA IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE PERSON AUTHORIZED BY THE COMMITTEE. FURTHER ENQUIRES MADE FROM THE BANK AT KURALI MAINTAINED IN THE NAME OF S. BAL WINDER SINGH, WHEREIN THE SAID CHEQUE WAS TRANSFERRED AND CREDITED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE MONEY WAS WITHDRAWN IN CASH BY S. BALWINDE R SINGH, AFTER THE DEPOSIT OF THE SAID CHEQUE. FURTHER EFFORTS WERE M ADE TO CONTACT S. BALWINDER SINGH AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN THE AFFIDAV IT BUT HE WAS FOUND NOT AVAILABLE AS HAD GONE OUT OF INDIA. ACCORDINGLY, T HE ASSESSING OFFICER INCLUDED THE SAID SUM OF RS. 11,26,000/- AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT FROM THE ENQUIRES MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE EXISTENCE OF S. BALWINDER SINGH WAS DULY PROVED WHO WAS HAVING A BANK ACCOUNT, TO WHICH AMOUNT WERE REMITTED. IN VIE W OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF S. BALWINDER SINGH, THE CIT(A) HELD THAT THE AMOUN T IN QUESTION WAS TO BE TAKEN TO BE BELONGING TO HIM ONLY. THE CIT(A) F URTHER CONCLUDED BY HOLDING THAT EVEN IF CROSS EXAMINATION OF S. BALWID NER SINGH WAS CARRIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CERTAIN DISCREPANCY WE RE FOUND, AT BEST THE 4 ASSESSING OFFICER COULD HAVE PROCEEDED AGAINST S. B ALWINDER SINGH, AND NO ADVERSE VIEW WAS TO TAKEN IN THE HANDS OF THE A SSESSEE. THE CIT(A) IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 11,26 ,000/-. THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE SAME. 4. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER POINTED OUT THAT THOUGH THE TOTAL CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WERE RS. 16.92 LACS BUT ADDITION WAS M ADE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 11.26 LACS. RELIANCE WAS PLACED BY THE LD DR ON CIT VS. P. MOHANAKALA [291 ITR 278 (SC)]. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN WHICH HE EXPLAINED THE NA TURE OF DEPOSITS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. THE LD. AR FURTHER POINTED OUT T HAT THE SAID DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WERE ON ACCOUNT OF ENCASHMENT OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE RECEIPT WHICH IN TURN WAS ENCHASED THROUGH M/S JANA K GENERAL STORES AS EVIDENCED BY THE VARIOUS ENCASHMENT CERTIFICATES IN THIS REGARD. IT WAS FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE STATEMENT OF SHRI JANA J RAJ WAS ALSO RECORDED IN WHICH HE CONFIRMED TO HAVE ENCASHED THE SAID FOR EIGN EXCHANGE. THE LD. AR POINTED OUT THAT THE SAID MONEY DID NOT BELO NG TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAID STAND WAS ADMITTED BY THE ACTUAL RECIPIENT OF THE SAID AMOUNT AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY, THE SAM E CANNOT BE INCLUDED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY CON SIDERED THEIR SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. DURING THE COU RSE OF SCRUTINY, THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS. 16,92,300/- IN HIS SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT NO. 3749 WITH BANK OF PUNJAB L TD. JAGRAON THROUGH PAY-IN-SLIPS DULY SIGNED BY THE ASSESSEE HI MSELF. ON BEING CALLED UPON TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE AFORES AID DEPOSITS, THE 5 ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT A SUM OF RS.11,26,000 BELON GED TO BAWA BALWINDER SINGH WHILE THE REMAINING AMOUNT REPRESEN TED HIS BUSINESS RECEIPTS. THE AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CARRYI NG ON BUSINESS IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S RAVINDER GLASS HOUSE. HE THE REFORE HELD THAT A PART OF THE IMPUGNED DEPOSITS REPRESENTED HIS BUSIN ESS RECEIPTS. HE HOWEVER PROCEEDED TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSES SEE THAT A SUM OF RS.11,26,000/- OUT OF AFORESAID DEPOSITS BELONGED T O BALWINDER SINGH. DURING THE COURSE OF EXAMINATION BY THE AO, THE ASS ESSEE EXPLAINED BEFORE THE AO THAT SHRI BALWINDER SINGH WAS SEVADAR OF GURDWARA AT NANAKSAR VILLAGE SINGHPURA NEAR KURALI AND THAT THE ASSESSEE, IN THE ABSENCE OF S BALVINDER SINGH, COLLECTED RS.11,26,00 0/- FROM THE SANGAT ON BEHALF OF SHRI BALVINDER WHICH HE FIRST DEPOSITED I N HIS OWN BANK ACCOUNT AND LATER TRANSFERRED THE SAME TO THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI BALVINDER SINGH. IT WAS FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT THE SAID SUM REPRESENTED DONATIONS GIVEN BY THE FOLLOWERS FROM OUTSIDE INDIA IN FOREIG N CURRENCY . IT WAS CLAIMED BEFORE THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE RETURNED TH E SAID AMOUNT RECEIVED ON BEHALF OF THE GURDWARA TO BALWINDER SINGH THROUG H TWO ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES FOR A SUM OF RS. 5,13,000/- + RS. 6,13,000/ -. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CLAIMED THAT THE AFORESAID MONEY WAS KEPT BY HIM AS TRUST MONEY AND THEREFORE THEY WERE NOT INCLUDIBLE IN HIS HANDS AS HIS UNEXPLAINED INCOME. IN SUPPORT OF HIS SUBMISSIONS, THE ASSESSEE FILED A FFIDAVIT OF BALWINDER SINGH WHICH HAS BEEN REPRODUCED AT PAGES 2-3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND READS AS UNDER: THAT SHRI BALWINDER SINGH IS FOLLOWER OF GURDWARA NANAKSAR, VILLAGE SINGHPURA, NEAR KURALI AND FOR WELFARE OF GURDWARA, SOME MONEY WAS DONATED BY THE SANGAT AND DUE TO HIS ABSENCE FROM GURDWARA AT THAT TIME THE DUTY WAS ALLOTTED TO SHRI RAVINDER PAL SIN GH OF AGWAR GUJRAN, JAGRAON WHO DEPOSITED MONEY IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. LATERON THE MONEY WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE ACCOUNT OF SHRI BALWINDER SINGH. IT HAS ALSO B EEN CONTENDED THAT SHRI RAVINDER PAL SINGH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS MONEY. 6 6. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM THAT HE HAD RECEIVED THE MONEY AS DONATION FROM THE FOLLOWERS FROM OUTSIDE INDIA ON BEHALF OF BALWINDER SINGH, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED RECEIPT FOR ENCASHMENT OF FOREIG N EXCHANGE BY JANAK GENERAL STORE. 7. THE AO CONSIDERED THE AFORESAID EXPLANATION GIVE N BY THE ASSESSEE. HE HOWEVER REJECTED THE SAME ON THE FOLLOWING GROUN DS: (I) THE AFFIDAVIT OF BALWINDER SINGH FILED BY THE A SSESSEE BEFORE THE AO WAS REJECTED BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THAT BALWINDER SINGH WAS NOT PRODUCED FOR CROSS- EXAMINATION. (II) THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE DO NATION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 11.26 LAKHS WAS RECEIVED IN FOREI GN CURRENCY. THE RECEIPT PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CLAIMING THAT FOREIGN CURRENCY WAS GOT CHANGED TO I NDIAN CURRENCY THROUGH JANAK GENERAL STORE, WAS REJECTED ON THE GROUND THAT NEITHER THE RECEIPT NOR ANY OTHER DOCUMENT INDICATED THE NAME OF THE PERSON HOLDING T HE FOREIGN CURRENCY OR THE PASSPORT NO. OF THE PERSON FROM WHOM FOREIGN CURRENCY WAS RECEIVED. (III) HE EXAMINED THE BANK ACCOUNT OF BALWINDER SIN GH AND FOUND THAT TWO CHEQUES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF BALWINDER SINGH. H E ALSO FOUND THAT BALWINDER SINGH HAD SUBSEQUENTLY WITHDRAWN MATCHING AMOUNT FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT IN CASH. SINCE THERE WAS FIRST DEPOSIT OF RS.11,26,00 0/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF BALWINDER SINGH AND SUBSEQUENTL Y MATCHING AMOUNT WAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF BALWINDER SINGH, THE AO CONCLUDED THAT THE TRANSACTION WAS NOT GENUINE. (IV) ACCORDING TO THE DEPARTMENT, THERE WAS NO EVID ENCE ON RECORD TO ESTABLISH THAT BALWINDER SINGH WAS APPOIN TED AS SEWADAR FOR GURDWARA OR THAT HE HAD AUTHORISED T HE ASSESSEE TO COLLECT THE MONEY ON HIS BEHALF. 8. THE STATEMENT OF SHRI JANAK RAJ WAS ALSO RECORDE D IN WHICH HE ADMITTED TO HAVE EN-CASHED BRITISH POUNDS AND CANAD IAN DOLLARS AND CONFIRMED TO HAVE HANDED OVER ONE ACCOUNT PAYEE CHE QUE OF RS. 4.00 LAKHS AND TWO BEARER CHEQUES OF RS. 4.00 LAKHS AND RS. 3.49 LAKHS . THE SAID BEARER CHQEUES WERE STATED TO HAVE BEEN ISSUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE 7 ASSESSEE. THE COPIES OF THE STATEMENT ARE PLACED AT PAGES 1 TO 5 OF THE PAPER BOOK. CERTIFICATE OF ONE SHRI KULWANT SINGH D ATED 12.12.2007 HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD, IN WHICH HE CLAIMS TO HAVE H ANDED OVER 14000 STERLING POUNDS TO THE ASSESSEE, WHICH AMOUNT WAS C OLLECTED FROM THE U.K. DONORS, WHO GAVE THE DONATIONS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER ENCLOSED THE ENCASHMENT CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY M/S JANAK GEN ERAL STORE, WHICH ARE PLACED AT PAGES 6 TO 10 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE SAID ENCASHMENT CERTIFICATES ARE IN RESPECT OF ENCASHMENT OF 10,000 G.B. POUNDS OF RS. 7,46,200. THE SAID ENCASHMENT CERTIFICATES ARE ISS UED IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE, WITH HIS NATIONALITY MENTIONED AS INDIAN. NO DETAIL OF HOLDER OF PASSPORT ARE GIVEN IN THE SAID CERTIFICATE DATED 15 .10.2004. THE GENUINENESS OF THE SAID CERTIFICATE IS IN DOUBT AS THE NORM FOR ENCASHMENT OF FOREIGN CURRENCY IS THAT THE PERSON BRINGING IN THE FOREIGN EXCHANGE IS AUTHORISED TO EXCHANGE THE SAME INTO INDIA CURRENCY HAS TO FURNISH HIS PASSPORT DETAILS. IT IS NOT A CASE OF ENCASHMENT OF FOREIGN CHEQUES OR DRAFT, WHEREIN THE RECIPIENT CAN ENCASH THE SAME, B UT IS A CASE OF ENCASHMENT OF FOREIGN CURRENCY IN CASH. NO RELIANCE CAN BE PLACED ON THE SAME. THE STATEMENT RECORDED OF JANAK RAJ, MONEY E XCHANGER DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE ABSENCE OF DETAILS. 9. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE ARE INCLINED TO ENDORSE THE FINDINGS OF THE AO. THE IMPUGNED SUM HA S BEEN DEPOSITED IN CASH IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS AUTHORISED TO COLLECT THE MONEY/DONATIONS ON BEHALF OF GURUDWARA. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON R ECORD TO ESTABLISH THAT EVEN BALWINDER SINGH WAS AUTHORISED TO COLLECT THE MONEY ON BEHALF OF GURDWARA. THERE IS ALSO NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD THAT BALWINDER SINGH WAS EMPOWERED TO AUTHORISE ANYONE TO COLLECT THE MONEY/ DONATION ON BEHALF OF GURDWARA. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT TO HAV E COLLECTED THE MONEY 8 AGGREGATING TO RS. 11,26,000/- ON BEHALF OF GURDWAR A AND HANDED OVER THE SAME TO BALWINDER SINGH BY TWO CHEQUES, THE OBSERVA TIONS MADE BY THE AO THAT THE DEPOSITS SO MADE IN THE ACCOUNT OF BALW INDER SINGH WERE SUBSEQUENTLY WITHDRAWN FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT, CANNO T BE LIGHTLY BRUSHED ASIDE. IT IS A CASE WHERE THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS TO HA ND OVER THE AMOUNT TO BALWINDER SINGH THROUGH CHEQUES BUT THE MONEY IS FO UND TO HAVE BEEN WITHDRAWN IN CASH FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF BALWINDE R SINGH. THE WHOLE STORY RINGS FALSE RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING TO END. AS REGARDS THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY BALWINDER SINGH, THE LAW IS FAIRLY WELL SE TTLED. AFFIDAVITS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF EVIDENCE IN THE EVI DENCE ACT BUT ARE ADMISSIBLE IF THE CONDITIONS OF ORDER XIX, CPC ARE SATISFIED. RULE 2 OF ORDER XIX, CPC EMPOWERS THE COURT TO ORDER FOR CROS S EXAMINATION OF THE DEPONENT. THE AO ORDERED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE T HE DEPONENT, NAMELY, BALWINDER SINGH FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION BUT BALWINDER SINGH WAS NOT PRODUCED BEFORE HIM. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT IF THE PARTY FAILS TO PRODUCE THE DEPONENT FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION DESPITE THE ORDE R OF THE COURT, AFFIDAVIT OF THE DEPONENT FILED IN THE COURT HAS TO BE IGNORED. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE AFORESAID, THE AO HAS RIGHTLY NOT ATTACHED ANY CREDIBILITY TO THE AFFIDAVIT FOR THE REASONS THAT THE CIRCUMSTA NCES SURROUNDING THE CASE ARE COMPLETELY INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS STATE D IN THE AFFIDAVIT. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO ESTABLISH THAT BALWINDE R SINGH WAS AT ALL APPOINTED SEWADAR OF GURDWARA BY AN AUTHORITY COMPE TENT TO APPOINT SEWADAR IN A GURDWARA. 10. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, THE ONUS IS UPON THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THE NATURE OF ENTRIES IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT INCLUDING THE BANK ACCOUNT, EXPENDITURE AND SOURCES OF THE SAME WITH EVIDENCE. THE ONUS CAST UPON THE ASSESSEE IS NOT AN EMPTY FORMALITY BUT IS TO BE DISCHARGED WITH EVIDENCE WHICH CAN STAND THE TEST OF JUDICIAL 9 SCRUTINY. THE EXPLANATION ENVISAGED BY SECTION 68 I S A NOT A FANTASTIC OR FANCIFUL EXPLANATION BUT A GENUINE EXPLANATION DULY SUBSTANTIATED BY RELIABLE EVIDENCE. IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE BEFORE US THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT IT HAD RECEIVED CERTAIN AMOUNT ON BEHALF OF AN OTHER PERSON WHO IN TURN IS IN CHARGE OF A GURDWARA AND HE WAS OUT OF C OUNTRY, THE SAID AMOUNT REMITTED BY THE SANGAT BEING IN THE FORM OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE, AFTER ENCASHMENT WAS DEPOSITED IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH LATTER WAS RETURNED TO THE SAID PERSON BY CHEQUE. THE ASSESSE E HAS TRIED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF MONEY DEPOSITED IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT, WITHOUT EVIDENCE. MERE EXPLANATION IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS CAST UPON HIM UNDER THE ACT. REPEATED OPPORTUNITIES WERE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE ITS STAND BUT EXCEPT FOR FILING AN AFFIDAVIT OF BABA BALWINDER SINGH AND PRODUCING SOME ALLEGED ENCASHMENT CERTIFICATE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ESTABLISHED THE VERACITY OF HIS EXPLANATION. THE A FFIDAVIT OF A THIRD PERSON IS MERE SELF SERVING EVIDENCE UNLESS THE SAME IS BA CKED BY SOME OTHER EVIDENCE JUSTIFYING THE NATURE OF THE TRANSACTION O R THE CONCERNED PARTY APPEARS IN PERSON TO VERIFY ITS CONTENTS. WE FIND THAT THOUGH SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES WERE ALLOWED BY THE AO BUT THE ASSESS EE FAILED TO AVAIL OF THE SAME. 11. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID, THE ORDER PASSED BY T HE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION IS VACATED AND THAT OF THE AO IS RESTORED. RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS AL LOWED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 21 ST DAY OF JUNE, 2011. SD/- SD/- (D.K.SRIVASTAVA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 21 ST JUNE, 2011 RATI 10 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 11