Shri Prafulbhai Krushnakant Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Incoem tax Officer,Ward-6(5), Ahmedabad

ITA 1381/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2399 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 02-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 25-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VILAS V SHINDE
• Assessee Lawyers: P M PATEL
• Keywords: Peak credit
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JM, & MANISH BORAD, AM. ITA NO.1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR: 2008-09 SHRI PRAFULBHAI K. PATEL, 26, SHRI NIKUNJ FLATS, RANNAPARK, GHATLODIA, AHMEDABAD. VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(5), AHMEDABAD. APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN ACTPP 8653M APPELLANT BY P. M. PATEL, AR RESPONDENT BY VILAS V. SHINDE, DR DATE OF HEARING: 02/12/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 01/03/2016 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) XI, AHMEDABAD, DATED 24.4.2012. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) F OR ASST. YEAR 2008-09 BY ITO, WD-6(5), AHMEDABAD, ON 22.12.2010. ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. THE LD. CIT(A)-XI, AHMEDABAD IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE CASH OF RS.6,09,500/- AS LOAN/DEPOSITS AND ADDING T O TOTAL INCOME AS NON GENUINE LOAN/DEPOSIT U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT. ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 2 2. THE LD. CIT(A)-XI, AHMEDABAD IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISBELIEVING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT RS.6,09,500/- WAS COLLEC TED FROM MEMBERS CONSTITUTED AOP/BOI FOR THE SHARE TRADING B USINESS. 3. YOUR APPELLANT PRAYS TO ADD, ALTER OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE RECO RDS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS O F TRADING IN DYES AND FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASST. YEAR 2008- 09 ON 18.9.2008 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.2,22,101/-. THE CASE W AS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE AC T DATED 20/08/2009 WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER THAT ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED CASH OF RS.11,85,000/- IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT HELD WITH BHAGYODAYA CO-OP. BANK LTD.. ON B EING ASKED ABOUT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT BY ASSESSING OFFIC ER, ASSESSEE REPLIED THAT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT IS FROM THE OPENING CASH BALANCE HELD BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS CASH RECEIV ED FROM RELATIVES FOR DOING SHARE TRADING BUSINESS. IN THIS REPLY ASS ESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THIS SHARE TRADING BUSINESS WAS CARR IED ON IN FORM OF ASSOCIATION OF PERSONS (AOP) OF ASSESSEE, HIS WIFE, BROTHER IN LAW AND THEIR WIVES AND THIS BUSINESS WAS OPERATED THRO UGH REGULAR BUSINESS ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. AFTER EXAMINING THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE, ASSESSING OFFICER CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE WAS NO AG REEMENT FOR THE SO CALLED AOP, NOR THERE WAS ANY PAN AND NEITHER AN Y BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE SEPARATELY AVAILABLE FOR THE AOP AND AFTER CONSIDERING ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 3 THE CASH WITHDRAWALS DURING THE YEAR OF RS.6,75,500 /- ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT FOR UNACCOUNTED CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.6,09, 500/- WAS MADE ALONG WITH DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES AT RS.54,695/- AND THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ASSESSED AT RS.8,86,300/-. 4. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CI T(A) WHO PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY RESTRI CTING THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES TO RS.20,370/- AND CONFIRM ED THE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT AT RS.6,09,500/-. WHILE CONFIRMIN G THE ADDITION OF RS.6,09,500/- LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED AS UNDER :- 4.3 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS . I HAVE ALSO PERUSED VARIOUS EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT DURING APPELLA TE PROCEEDINGS AND ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE FIRST CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT IS THAT MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE A.O.P. THIS CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE ACCEPTED KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS THAT THIS A.O.P. NAMEL Y PRAFULBHAI K, PATEL (AOP) WAS NEVER FORMALIZED BY WAY OF REGISTRATION. SECOND LY, THIS A.O.P. DOES NOT HAVE A BANK ACCOUNT THIRDLY, THIS A.O.P. HAS NOT BEEN IS SUED PAN AND IT IS NOT ASSESSED TO TAX. FOURTHLY, THIS A.O.P. DOES NOT EXI ST NO MORE. THIS WAS APPARENTLY FLOATED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DE POSITS IN THE S. B. ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT IT IS A MATTER OF RECORD THAT SO CALL ED CASH CONTRIBUTIONS WERE DEPOSITED IN THE S.B. ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT SINC E MONEY WAS DEPOSITED IN THE S.B. ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT, ACCORDINGLY IT HAS T O BE PRESUMED THAT THE SAME BELONGS TO THE APPELLANT THE APPELLANT FURTHER CONT ENDS THAT COPY OF ANNUAL ACCOUNTS OF PRAFULBHAI K. PATEL (AOP) WAS FILED BEF ORE THE A.O, HOWEVER, PERUSAL OF THESE ACCOUNTS REVEALS THAT THESE ARE UN -AUDITED. THE ABOVE FACTS REVEAL THAT THE FORMATION OF A.O.P. AND THE SO CALL ED ACCOUNTS OF AOP ARE SELF SERVING EXERCISE. THE ABOVE FACTS INDICATE THAT A.O .P. NEVER EXISTED AND I AM NOT INCLINED TO AGREE WITH THE CONTENTIONS OF THE APPEL LANT 4.4 THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO TAKEN AN ALTERNATE PLEA THAT IT HAS RECEIVED CASH LOANS FROM CLOSE RELATIVES. TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS CO NTENTION, APPELLANT HAS FURNISHED COPY OF CONFIRMATIONS FROM SEVEN PERSONS. IT IS SEEN THAT ALL THESE LOANS HAD BEEN RECEIVED IN CASH. OUT OF THESE LOANS , FIVE LOANS ARE LESS THAN RS.20,000/-. THE DENOMINATION OF THESE LOANS ARE IN TENTIONALLY KEPT LESS THAN RS.20.000/-, JUST TO EVADE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 26 9 SS OF THE IT. ACT HOWEVER, IN CASE OF TWO LOANS FROM DHANESH M.PATEL AND VISHAKAB EN M. PATEL, THERE ARE VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 269 SS OF THE IT . ACT. PERUSAL OF CONFIRMATIONS ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 4 REVEALS THAT THESE CONFIRMATIONS ARE HAVING SAME FO RMAT AND FONT. THESE ARE APPARENTLY PRINTED FROM THE SAME PRINTER. ALL THESE CONFIRMATIONS WERE ISSUED ON THE SAME DATE I.E. 1-4-2008.THIS WAY, THESE CONFIRM ATIONS WERE ENGINEERED AND THESE ARE SELF SERVING DOCUMENTS. SOME OF THESE PER SONS ARE ASSESSED TO TAX. HOWEVER, THIS FACT CHANGE COMPLEXION OF ENTIRE PROC EEDINGS. IN VIEW OF THIS, I HOLD THAT THESE CONFIRMATIONS ARE SELF SERVING DOC UMENTS AND THE SAME ARE HEREBY REJECTED. 4.5 THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO TAKEN AN ALTERNATE PLEA THAT PEAK IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT SHOULD BE TAKEN AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE A.O. HAD MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.6,09,500/--AFTER GIVING BENEFIT O F CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM THE S.B. ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT OF RS.6,75,500/-. IT IS A MATTER OF RECORD THAT CASH OF RS. 11,85,000/-- WAS DEPOSITED IN HIS ACCOUNT. THE A.O. HAS GIVEN BENEFIT OF CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM THIS ACCOUNT THIS WAY, AVAILABILITY OF EXCESS CASH IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT WAS TAXED. THE APPELLANT COULD NOT EX PLAIN AVAILABILITY OF CASH OF RS.6,09,500/--. THE APPELLANT DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS HAD MADE THIS ARGUMENT FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT ONLY AND IT HAS N OT BROUGHT ANYTHING ON RECORD TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS CONTENTION. ACCORDINGLY, THIS CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT IS REJECTED. 4.6 IN VIEW OF ABOVE FACTS, I HOLD THAT APPELLANT C OULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.6,09,500/-- IN HIS S.B. ACCOUNT. 1 ACCORDINGLY, ADDITION OF RS.6,09,500/-- IS CONFIRMED. THIS GROUND CF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE THE T RIBUNAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS.6,09,500/- US/6 8 OF THE ACT. 6. LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEES MAIN BUSINE SS IS OF TRADING IN DYES AND IS CONVERSANT WITH THE SHARE TR ADING BUSINESS. LOOKING TO HIS ABILITY IN SHARE TRADING BUSINESS HI S RELATIVES INCLUDING HIS BROTHER IN LAW AND THEIR WIVES GAVE CASH TO THE ASSESSEE FOR DOING THE SHARE TRADING BUSINESS. THIS CASH WAS PUT IN TH E BANK ACCOUNT AS AND WHEN RECEIVED AND TRADING OF SHARES WAS CARRIED ON TREATING IT TO BE A BUSINESS OF AOP. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE RE WAS NO SEPARATE BANK ACCOUNT OPENED FOR SHARE TRADING BUSI NESS AND THE ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 5 BANK ACCOUNT WITH BHAGYODAYA CO-OP. BANK WHICH WAS IN ASSESSEES PERSONAL NAME AND WAS UTILIZED FOR CARRYING ON THIS ACTIVITY. 7. LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SEPARATE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR SHARE TRADING BUSINESS BUT B ECAUSE OF NEGLIGIBLE INCOME THE SAME WERE NOT SHOWN IN THE IN COME-TAX RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BUT THE CASH RECEIVED FROM RE LATIVES WAS NOT IN A SHAPE OF UNSECURED LOAN BUT WAS PART OF BUSINESS VENTURE CARRIED ON AS AN AOP AND, THEREFORE, NO ADDITION TO BE MADE UNDER SECTION 269SS FOR CASH LOAN TAKEN AND ALTERNATIVELY SUBMITT ED THAT EVEN IF THE CONTENTION OF SHARE TRADING IN THE NAME OF AOP IS N OT ACCEPTED THEN THE PEAK CREDIT METHOD TO BE APPLIED WHICH IN THE C ASE OF ASSESSEE IS RS.2,27,442/-. 8. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS O F LOWER AUTHORITIES. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTION AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD. GROUND OF APPEAL TAKEN BY ASSESSEE ONLY RE VOLVES ROUND THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING T HE ADDITION OF RS.6,09,500/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT AND ALSO NOT BELIEV ING THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE THAT RS.6,09,500/- WAS CASH COLLECTED FRO M RELATIVES AS MEMBERS OF AOP/BOI OF THE SHARE TRADING BUSINESS. 10. FIRST WE TAKE UP THE GROUND THAT WHETHER THERE ACTUALLY EXISTED AN AOP. FROM GOING THROUGH THE RECORDS CAREFULLY WE FIND THAT THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MEMBERS TO FORM AN ASS OCIATION OF ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 6 PERSONS, THERE WAS NO SEPARATE PAN TAKEN IN THE NAM E OF AOP AND ALL THE CASH RECEIVED FROM THE RELATIVES WERE FORMI NG PART OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN H IS RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN THE CAPACITY AS AN INDIVIDUAL. THER EFORE, IN THE EYES OF LAW THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS SHO WN ABOUT THE LEGAL EXISTENCE OF AN AOP. INCOME-TAX DPARTMENT CAN ASSESS AN ENTITY AS AN AOP ONLY IF IT HAS A SEPARATE PAN AND THERE IS NO MECHANISM IN THE STATUTE FOR INCLUDING THE INCOME O F AN AOP ALONG WITH RETURN OF AN INDIVIDUAL. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY BASIS IN THE SUBMISSION OF LD. AR THAT THERE ACTUALLY EXISTED AN Y AOP AND THEREFORE, THE CASH RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM H IS RELATIVES CANNOT BE TREATED AS A CONTRIBUTION BY THE RELATIVE S TOWARDS THE SHARE TRADING BUSINESS UNDER A COMMON AOP. THE ASSESSEE H AS RELIED ON VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS. HOWEVER, THE FACTS DISCUSSED IN THESE JUDGMENTS ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE OF ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, WE DISMISS THE CONTENTIONS OF ASSESS EE FOR ACCEPTING THE EXISTENCE OF AN AOP. 10.1 NOW WE TAKE THE ISSUE ABOUT ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT OF RS.6,09,500/-. FROM GOING THROUGH THE PAPER BOOK WE FIND THAT SUMARRIZED CASH FLOW FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08 HAS BEEN PRODUCED WHICH IS REPRODUCED BELOW :- PARTICULARS AMOUNT (RS.) AMOUNT (RS.) OPENING CASH AS ON 1.4.2007 1,67,500/ - NEW CASH INTRODUCED IN AOP 1.VISHAKHABEN M. PATEL 1,82,000/ - ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 7 2. DHANESH M. PATEL 55,000/ - 3. BHAVESH M. PATEL 16,100/ - 4. RESHMA D. PATEL 18,500/ - 5. BINAL B. PATEL 15,000/ - 6. LABHUBEN M. PATEL 15,000/ - 7. KANCHANBEN K. PATEL 16,000/ - 8. PANKAJ R. PATEL 17,500/ - 9. PRAFUL K. PATEL (ASSESSEE HIMSELF) 25,500/ - 10.KRUSHN AKANT N. PATEL 83,000/ - TOTAL 6,11,100/- CLOSING CASH BALANCE AS ON 31.3.2008 - 1,600/- NET AMOUNT 6,09,500/ - WITHDRAWAL OF CASH THIS YEAR FROM BANK 5,75,500/ - TOTAL 11,85,000/ - FROM GOING THROUGH THE ABOVE SHOWN CASH FLOW CHART FOR F.Y. 2007- 08, WE SEE THAT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN RS.6,11,100/- AS NEW CASH INTRODUCED DURING THE YEAR WHICH ARE FLOWING DOWN I N 10 ENTRIES. OUT OF THE TEN ENTRIES RS.25,500/- HAS BEEN SHOWN AS AN ADDITION MADE BY ASSESSEE HIMSELF AND OUT OF THE REMAINING NINE E NTRIES IN SIX ENTRIES THE INDIVIDUAL AMOUNT OF ENTRY-WISE LOAN IS LESS THAN RS.20,000/- AND ITS TOTAL COMES TO RS.98,100/-. ONL Y IN CASE OF THREE ENTRIES THE INDIVIDUAL AMOUNT RECEIVED IS MORE THAN RS.20,000/- AND THE TOTAL OF THESE THREE ENTRIES IS RS.3,20,000/- R ECEIVED FROM FOLLOWING PARTIES - ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 8 1.VISHAKHABEN M. PATEL 1,82,000/ - 2. DHANESH M. PATEL 55,000/ - 3 .KRUSHNAKANT N. PATEL 83,000/ - TOTAL 3,20,000/ - 11. FURTHER IN THE ABOVE CASH FLOW STATEMENT ASSESS EE HAS SHOWN AN OPENING CASH BALANCE AS ON 1.4.2007 AT RS.1,67,5 00/-. IT IS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AS A CASH IN HAND IN HIS RE GULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND REVENUE HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN NOT ACCEPTING THE OPENING CASH IN HAND. WE ACCORDINGLY ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AR ABOUT THE SOURCE OF CASH OF RS.1,67,500/ - BROUGHT FORWARD FROM PREVIOUS YEAR. 12. NOW AS FAR AS ADDITION IN CASH OF RS.25,500/- B ROUGHT IN BY ASSESSEE MR. PRAFUL K. PATEL IS CONCERNED WE GATHER FROM THE DOCUMENTS PLACED ON RECORD THAT ASSESSEE RECEIVED S ALARY AND BONUS FROM M/S AMI INDUSTRIES FOR F.Y.2006-07 AND T HIS SALARY AND BONUS WAS RECEIVED IN CASH DURING THE YEAR UNDER AP PEAL AND THE SAME WAS BROUGHT IN AS AN ADDITION TO THE CAPITAL B Y THE ASSESSEE. AS THE SOURCE OF THIS CASH ADDITION OF RS.25,500/- IS EXPLAINED, WE ACCEPT THE SAME TO THIS EXTENT AS THE REVENUE HAS N OT OBJECTED TO THE SOURCE SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. 13. NOW WE TAKE UP UNSECURED CASH LOAN OF RS.98,100 /- RECEIVED FROM SIX PARTIES AND EACH LOAN AMOUNT BEING LESS TH AN RS.20,000/-. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED NECESSARY DOCUM ENTS AND ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 9 EVIDENCES TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND GENUINENESS OF THE CASH RECEIVED FROM FOLLOWING SIX PARTIES WHICH ARE NAMED AS UNDER :- 1. BHAVESH M. PATEL 16,100/- 2 RESHMA D. PATEL 18,500/- 3. BINAL B. PATEL 15,000/- 4. LABHUBEN M. PATEL 15,000/- 5. KANCHANBEN K. PATEL 16,000/- 6. PANKAJ R. PATEL 17,500/- TOTAL 98,100/- AS ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND GENUINENESS OF THE CASH LOAN FROM ABOVE SIX PARTIES AT RS.98,100/- AND FURTHER TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM EACH PERSON IS LESS THAN RS.20 ,000/- THEN THERE IS NO CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 269SS OF THE ACT AND WE ACCORDINGLY ACCEPT THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. AR ABOUT THE SOURCE OF CASH AT RS.98,100/- FROM ABOVE SAID SIX P ARTIES. 14. NOW WE TAKE UP THE ISSUE ABOUT CASH LOAN RECEIV ED AT RS.3,20,000/- FROM FOLLOWING THREE PARTIES :- 1.VISHAKHABEN M. PATEL 1,82,000/ - 2. DHANESH M. PATEL 55,000/ - 3 .KRUSHNAKANT N. PATEL 83,000/ - TOTAL 3,20,000/ - ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 10 FROM PERUSAL OF RECORD AND THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE TH E IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION S OF CASH LOAN RECEIVED FROM THE ABOVE THREE PARTIES AND MERELY SE EMS TO BE AN ADJUSTMENT TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF CASH IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. FOR THE LACK OF REQUISITE EVIDENCES AND INFORMATION, WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THE CONTENTIONS OF LD. AR AND WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY MADE THE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF CASH CREDIT FOR THE SUM OF RS.3,20,000/- RECEIVED FROM ABOVE SAID THREE PARTIES. 15. SUMMARISING OUR ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE HEREBY DEC IDE THAT OUT OF TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.6,09,500/- U/S 68 OF THE AC T, WE DELETE THE ADDITION FOR RS.2,91,100/- ON ACCOUNT OF FOLLOWING A) OPENING CASH AS ON 1.4.2007 RS.1,67,500/- B) CASH LOAN EACH LESS THAN RS.20,000 RS. 98,100/ - C) CASH ADDITION BY ASSESSEE RS. 25,500/- TOT AL RS.2,91,100/- ACCORDINGLY OUT OF TOTAL ADDITION MADE AT RS.6,09,5 00/- WE DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.2,91,100/- AND SUSTAIN ADDITION OF R S.3,18,400/-. 16. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALL OWED. ITA NO. 1381/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 11 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST MARCH, 2016 SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 1/3/2016 MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 16 /02/2016 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 22/02/2016 OTHER MEMBER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: __________ 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 1/3/16 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: