Shri Shaunak Shailesh Shah, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1249/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5832 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 30-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-04-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Peak credit; Additional evidence
• Section: 142(1); 68

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 1 2 49 / AHD/201 4 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2010 - 2011 SHRI SHAUNAK SHAILESH SHAH, 9, NEELKANTHBUNGLOWS, NR.HDFC BANK, PRAHLADNAGAR, AHMEDABAD - 380015. PAN :AANFA7638P VS ITO, WARD - 8(1), AHMEDABAD (APPLICANT) (RESPONENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TUSHAR P. HEMANI ,AR REVENUE BY : SHRI PRASOON KABRA , SR .DR / DATE OF HEARING : 30 / 03 /201 7 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25 / 05 /201 7 / O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASST. YEAR 2010 - 11 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME (APPEALS) - XV, AHMEDABAD (IN SHORT LD.CIT ( A ) ) DATED 31/03/2013 ARISING OUT OF ORDER U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX 1961 (HEREIN AFTER REFERRED AS ACT) FRAMED ON 05/02/2013 BY ITO , WARD(8) - 1 AHMEDABAD . 2. ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 2 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.69,48,000/ - U/S 69A OF THE ACT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE EVI DENCES SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDER THE EVIDENCES PRODUCED BY THE APPELLANT WHEREIN THE APPELLANT HAS PROVED THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDIBILITY OF THE PARTI ES GIVING LOANS. THE ACTION OF DISALLOWANCE U/S 69A IS THEREFORE COMPLETELY ERRONEOUS. 3. ALTERNATIVELY AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE THE LEARNED C1T(A) FAILS TO PROVIDE BENEFIT OF PEAK THEORY TO THE APPELLANT INSTEAD OF CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF ASSESSING O FFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.69,48,000/ - U/S 69A OF THE ACT. 4. BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE PASSED THE ORDERS WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACT AND THAT THEY FURTHER ERRED IN GROSSLY IGNORING VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS, EXPLANATIONS AND INFORMA TION SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT FROM TIME TO TIME WHICH OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BEFORE PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS. 5. THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S 234A/B/C/D OF THE ACT. 6. THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IN INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(L)(C) OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER, EDIT, DELETE, MODIFY OR CHANGE ALL OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF OR BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3 . AS SESSEE HAS RAISED SIX GROUNDS OF APPEALS OUT OF WHICH GROUNDS NO. 5 AND 6 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE. SOLE GRIEVANCE IN GROUND NO.1 TO 4 IS AGAINST ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.69,48,000/ - MADE BY LD.AO U/S.69A OF THE ACT BEING UNEXPLAINED MONEY . 4 . BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND DIRECTOROF THE COMPANY NAMED SAMVID STEELS PVT. LTD. RETURN OF INC OME WAS FILED ON 01/12/2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,57,200. CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT UNDER CASS. NOTICE U/S. ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 3 143(2) OF THE ACT FOLLOWED BY 142(1) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED AND DULY SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. 5 . LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER (IN SHORT LD.AO ) AS PER AIR RECEIVED FROM DEPARTMENT CALLED FOR THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT IN IDBI BANK AMOUNTING TO RS.69,48,000/ - . PART OF THE DETAIL FOR RS.28,00,000/ - WERE FILED HOWEVER, ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO SATISFY THE LD.AO ABOUT THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE CASH CREDITORS AND ACCORDINGLY ADDITION FOR UNEXPLAINED MONEY U/S.69 OF THE ACT WAS MADE FOR RS.69,48,000/ - . APART FROM THIS CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S.80C OF THE ACT FOR LIC PREMIUM OF RS.12,130/ - WAS ALSO DENIED FOR LACK OF EVIDENCE. INCOME ASSESSED AT RS.71,17,470/ - 6 . AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE LD.CIT(A) AGAINS T TH E ADDITION U/S.69A OF THE ACT. ADDITION AL EVIDENCE IN THE F ORM OF DOCUMENTS AND DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE CASH CREDITORS WERE FILED AND AD MITTED BY THE LD.CIT(A). R EMAND REPORT AS CALLED FOR WAS RECEIVED. O UT OF F IVE CASH CREDITORS EXCEPT ONE , ALL OTHER S , APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSES SING AUTHORITIES. LD.CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE BURDEN OF ACCEPTANCE OF INTEREST FREE CASH LOAN AND FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SATISFACTORY SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.69,48,0 00/ - IN THE IDBI BANK ACCOUNT AND ACCORDINGLY CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF LD.AO CONFIRMING ADDITION U/S.69A OF THE ACT FOR RS.69,48,000/ - 7 . AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE IS NOW IN A PPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 8 . LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.69,48,000/ - U/S.69A IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT WHICH CAME TO B E CONFIRMED BY CIT(A) AS WELL , HOWEVER, B OTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES FAILED TO APPRECIATE FACTS IN ENTIRETY. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS CLARIFIED THAT ASSESSEE FURNISHED E VIDENCES ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 4 W.R.T CASH DEPOSITS TO THE TUNE OF RS.57,00,000/ - R ECEIVED FROM FOLLOWING FIVE PARTIES . SR.NO. NAME AMOUNT 1. GHANSHYAMBHAI B. THAKOR RS.8,00,000/ - 2. JAVARSING P. THAKOR RS.11,00,000/ - 3. MALAJI C. THAKO RS.3,00,000/ - 4. DIWANJI POPATJI RS.12,00,000/ - 5. LAXMANJI C. THAKUR RS.23,00,000/ - TOTAL RS.57,00,000/ - 9. LEARNED COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE, ASSESSEE COULD FURNI SH EVIDENCES IN RESPECT OF THREE PARTIES ONLY AND HENCE, ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE PLACED BEFORE CIT(A) WHICH WERE ADMITTED AND REMAND REPORT WAS CALLED FOR WHICH WAS FU RNISHED BY LD.AO ON 17/02/2014. AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE REMAND REPORT, THAT LD.AO DURING REMAND PROCEEDINGS, ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE ALL THE ABOVE MENTIONED FIVE PERSONS. IN RESPONSE THERETO, ALL THE PERSONS, EXCEPT LAXMANJICHATURJITHAKOR, WERE PRODU CED BEFORE AO. LAXMANJI, BEING 78 YEARS OLD AND ALSO BEING PHYSICALLY WEAK, COULDNT APPEAR BEFORE AO. AO WAS INTIMATED ABOUT THE SAME BY ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 11/02/2014 AND LAXMANJIS MEDICAL CERTIFICATE WAS ALSO FURNISHED. STATEMENTS OF ALL THE OTH ER FOUR PERSONS WERE RECORDED BY ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN THEY CONFIRMED THE FACTUM OF HAVING ADVANCED THE CONCERNED SUM TO THE ASSESSEE. 10. AS REGARD IDENTITY OF LENDERS LD.COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME STANDS PROVED , SINCE CONFIRMATIONS OF ALL THE CONCERNED PERSONS ARE PLACED ON RECORD. EVEN FOUR PERSONS APPEARED BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS AND THEIR STATEMENTS WERE RECORDED BY ASSESSING OFFICER. AFFIDAVIT OF THE FIFTH PERSON (I.ELAXMANJITHAKOR) AND ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 5 HIS MEDICAL CERTIFICATE WERE PLACED ON REC ORD. THU S IDENTITY OF THE LENDERS DULY STANDS ESTABLISHED. 10.1 AS REGARDS TO GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS, LD.COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE LENDERS HAVE CONFIRMED THE FACTUM OF HAVING ADVANCED THE FUNDS TO THE ASSESSEE IN THEIR CONFIR MATIONS. FO UR PERSON EVEN ADMITTED THE FACT IN THEIR STATEMENTS RECORDED BY ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. THUS, EVEN GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS DULY STANDS ESTABLISHED. 10.2 AS REGARDS C REDITWORTHINESS OF TRANSACTION, IT WAS SUBMIT TED THAT LENDERS ARE HAVING SUBSTANTIAL LAND AND REVENUE RECORDS ARE FURNISHED IN SUPPORT OF THEIR LAND HOLDING. ONE OF THE LENDERS I.ELAXMANJI C. THAKOR HAD EVEN RECEIVED FUNDS ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF HIS LAND AND SUCH SALE CONSIDERATION WAS THE SOURCE FOR ADVANCING THE FUNDS TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, IN LIGHT OF THE SUBSTANTIAL LAND HOLDING IN THE NAME OF THE LENDERS, IT BECOMES CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT THE LENDERS ARE MEN OF MEANS. HENCE, EVEN CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE LENDERS STANDS ESTABLISHED. 11. THUS, ALL THE T HREE INGREDIENTS AS PRESCRIBED U/S.68 OF THE ACTARE PROVED BY THE ASSESSEE. SECTION 68 OF THE ACT CAST AN INITIAL BURDEN ON ASSESSEE TO PROVE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF LENDERS WHICH HAS BEEN DISCHARGED BY PLACING ON RECORD DOCUMENTARY E VIDENCES AS SPECIFIED IN ANNEXURE A. HAVING DISCHARGED THE INITIAL ONUS WITH SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION, ONUS SHIFTS ON THE REVENUE. THE ONLY OBJECTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER AND CIT(A) IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVED SOURCE OF SUCH PERSONS TO PROVIDE LOANS TO THE ASSESSEEI.EASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVED SOURCE OF SOURCE. ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 6 11.1 SECTION 68 OF THE ACT DOESNT REQUIRE AN ASSESSEE TO PROVE SOURCE OF THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS. HENCE, NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR U/S.68 OF THE ACT. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON: DCIT VS. ROHINI BUILDERS 256 ITR 360(GUJ.) MURLIDHARLAHORIMALVS. CIT 280 ITR 512 (GUJ.) CIT VSPRAGTI CO - OP.BANK LTD. 278 ITR 170 (GUJ.) CIT VS. ORISSA CORPORATION PVT. LTD. 159 ITR 78(SC) 11.2 HAVING FURNISHED THE AFORESAID DETAILS, THE CONCERNED CREDITS, BY NO STRETCH OF IMAGINATION, REMAIN UNEXPLAINED ANY FURTHER IN THE ASSESEES HANDS. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THECASE AND IN LIGHT OF EVIDENCE PLACED ON RECORD , LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION.ALTERNATIVELY, BENEFIT OF PEAK THEORY BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE INSTEAD OF CONFIRMING 12 . ON THE OTHER HAND LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED SUPPORTING THE ORDER OF LOWER AUTHORITI ES AND SUBMITTED THA T ASSESSEE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS AND CREDIT WOR THINESS OF THE CASH CREDITORS I N SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTIONS LD.DRRELIED ON THE DECISION OF CO - ORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF DEEPAK PETROCHEM LTD. V/S. ACIT IN ITA NO.739/AHD/2011 PRONOUNCED ON 02/03/2017 AND ACIT V/S. NOKODA FASHION PVT. LTD IN ITA NO.1716/AHD/2012 PRONOUNCED ON 18/08/2016 13 . WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTION AND PERUSED THE RECORD PLACED BEFORE US AND GONE THROUGH THE DECISION S REFERRED AND RELIED BY BOTH THE AUTHORITI ES. SOLITARY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.69,48,000/ - MADE BY LD.AO IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE IDBI BANK ACCOUNT. WE ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 7 OBSERVE THAT ASSESSEE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDE R CASS ON THE BASIS OF AIR RECEIVED BY THE DEPARTMENT REGARDING CASH DEPOSITED IN ASSESSEES IDBI BANK ACCOUNT OF RS.69,48,000/ - . LD.AO SEEK ED EXPLANATION FROM THE ASSESSEE ABOUT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE IDBI BANK DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ASSESSEE MENTIONED ABOUT THREE PERSON WHO WERE SHOWN AS AGRICULTURIST AND RS.28,00,000/ - WAS RECEIVED FROM THEM( RS.8,00,000/ - + RS.9,00,000/ - + RS.11,00,000/ - ) . APART FROM THIS NO OTHER INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED TO SATISFY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CASH CREDITORS. 13. 1 IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLANT AUTHORITY ASSESSEE REQUE STED FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN T HE FORM OF DOCUMENTS SHOWING THE DETAILS OF CASH CREDITORS , IDENTITY PROOF, C ONFIRMATIONS AND COPY OF 7/12 F O R M TO PROVE THE OWNERSHIP OF AGRICULTURE LAND AND INCOME EARNED THROUGH AGRICULTURE. ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE ACCEPTED AND REMAND REPORT DATED 17/ 02/2014 WAS RECEIVED FROM ASSESSING OFFICER . D ETAILS OF FOUR CASH CRE DITORS WHO APPEARED BEFORE THE A SSESSING AUTHORITY AND GAVE THEIR STATEMENTS ARE AS UNDER: SR.NO. NAME DATE OF STATEMENT AMOUNT OF CASH LOAN GIVEN TO ASSESSEE 1. GHANSHYAMBHAI B. THAKOR 06/02/2014 RS.8,00,000/ - 2. JAVARSING P. THAKOR 29/01/2014 RS.11,00,000/ - 3. MALAJI C. THAKO 31/01/2014 RS.3,00,000/ - 4. DIWANJIPOPATJI 11/02/2014 RS.12,00,000/ - TOTAL RS.34,00,000/ - ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 8 13 .2 AS REGARD TO FIFTH CASH CREDITOR NAMELY SHRI LAXAMANJI C THAKOR FROM WHOM RS.23,00,000/ - WAS RECEIVED , HE DIDNT APPEAR BEFORE ASSESSING AUTHORITI ES ON MEDICAL GROUND. HOWEVER, TWO AFFIDAVITS WERE SUBMITTED SHOWING DETAILS OF RS.9,00,000/ - AND RS.14,00,000 / - GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE ON 22/09/2 009 AND 08/01/2010. THE SOURCE OF RS.23,00,000/ - WAS SHOWN FROM ADVANCE RECEIVED FROM SALE OF AGRICULTURE LAND AT RS.35,00,000/ - . 14 . FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE REMAND REPORT APPEARING AT PAGE 11 TO 14 OF THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) , WE NOTICE THAT AS REGARDS TO CASH CREDITS OF RS.34,00,000/ - RECEIVED FROM FOUR PARTIES , ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN PROVING THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS , AS ALL THESE FOUR PARTIES REFERRED ABOVE APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSESSIN G AUTHORITIES AND GAVE THE STATEMENT S CONFIRMING THE TRANSACTION OF PROVIDING LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE FROM THEI R INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE . DETAILS OF THE IDENTITY PROOF AND COPY OF FORM 7/12 WERE PLACED BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES . 14.1 AS REGARD TO THE CASH LOAN FROM MR.LAXMANJI C. THAKOR OF RS.23,00,000/ - IS CONCERNED WE OBSERVE THAT THIS PERSON HAS NOT APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSESSING A UTHORITY EVEN THOUGH DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS, IDENTITY AND LAND OWNERSHIP WERE PLACED. M AJOR THRUST OF THE A SSESSEE WITH REGARDS TO THIS CASH CREDITOR IS THAT THE SOURCE OF RS.23,00,000/ - WAS OUT OF SALE PROCEED OF AGRICULTURE LAND WHICH WAS SOLD ON 22/09/2011. FROM GOING THROUGH THE RECORDS WE NOTICE THAT MR.LAXMANJI C. THAKOR IS AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS AND WAS FAC ING MEDICAL PROBLEM WHICH RESTRAINED HIM FROM APPEARING IN PERSON BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY. HOWEVER, AFFIDAVITS NARRATING PERSONAL DETAILS, CASH OF RS.9,00,000/ - AND RS.14,00,000/ - GIVEN ON 22/09/2009 AND 08/01/2010 HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED . AT PAGE 35 O F PAPER BOOK ASSESSEE HAS PLACED A COPY OF FAMILY ARRANGEMENT ENTERED BY ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 9 MR.LAXMANJI C. THAKOR, ALONGWITH COPY OF SALE DEED OF SALE OF AGRICULTURE LAND AT RS.35,00,000/ - . AS PER THIS FAMILY SETTLEMENT DOCUMENTS DATED 08/01/2010 RS.15,00,000/ - WAS RECEIVED AS ADVANCE TILL 05/01/2010 AND OUT OF THIS AMOUNT MR.LAXMANJI C. THAKOR ADVANCED RS.14,00,000/ - TO THE ASSESSEE. FROM GOING THROUGH THE SERIES OF DOCUMENTS RELATING TO MR.LAXAMANJI C. THAKOR, WE CONCUR WITH THE CONTENTION OF LD.COUNSEL THAT SUFFICIENT MATE RIAL HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD TO SATISFY THE CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF ADVANCE TOTALING TO RS.23,00,000/ - GIVEN BY MR.LAXMANJI C. THAKOR TO THE ASSESSEE. 15 . LD.DR HAS REFERRED AND RELIED ON TWO DECISIONS OF CO - ORDINATE BENCH BUT THEY ARE NOT SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE IN THE CASE OF DEEPAK PETROCHEM LTD V/S.ACIT ISSUE I S REGARD TO SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RECEIVED FROM 273 PARTIES OUT OF WHICH 272 PARTIES GAVE CASH TOWARDS SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND DETAILS OF THEIR ADDRESS AN D PANS WERE NOT PROVIDED FOR. SIMILAR IN THE CASE OF ACIT V/S NAKODA FASHION PVT. LTD. THE ISSUE RELATED TO ACCOMMODATION ENTRY PROVIDE D IN THE FORM OF SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM AND NONE OF THE PARTIES WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESS ING AUTHORITIES WHEREAS IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE SOME OF CASH CREDITORS HAVE APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSE SSING AUTHORITIES AND GAVE THEIR STATEMENTS ACCEPTING THAT THEY H A VE PAID THE MONEY TO THE ASSESSEE IN CASH. 15 .1 SUMMARIZING FACTS OF THE CASE , WE OBSERVE THAT ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CASH CREDIT S OF RS.57 ,00,000/ - RECEIVED FROM FOLLOWING FOUR PARTIES WHO APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES AND ACCEPTED TO HAVE PROVIDED CASH TO THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DOCUMENTS SHOWING AGRICULTURE LAND OW NER SHIP . ITA NO S.1249/AHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 10 SR.NO. NAME AMOUNT 1. GHANSHYAMBHAI B. THAKOR RS.8,00,000/ - 2. JAVARSING P. THAKOR RS.11,00,000/ - 3. MALAJI C. THAKO R RS.3,00,000/ - 4. DIWANJI POPATJI RS.12,00,000/ - 5. LAXMANJI C. THAKOR RS.23,00,000/ - TOTAL RS.57 ,00,000/ - 15.2 EXCEPT THE ABOVE SAID FIVE PARTIES , ASSESSEE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO SATISFY GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTH INESS OF CASH CREDITORS OF RS.12 ,48,000/ - WE THEREFORE IN THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMST ANCES OF THE CASE PARTLY ALLOW THE ASSESSEES APPEAL BY DELETING ADDITION OF R S.57 ,00,000/ - AND CONFIRM THE REMAINING ADDITION OF RS.12 ,48,000/ - U/S. 69A OF THE ACT. 16 . IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25 / 05 / 201 7 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/ - ( RAJPAL YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - ( MANISH BO R A D ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY AHMEDABAD; DATED 25 / 05 / 201 7 MANISH / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A), AHMEDABAD 5. , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. / GUARD FILE .