M/s. Goel & Goel, Itarsi V. The A.C.I.T., Bhopal

ITA 226/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9593 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 02-02-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: H P VERMA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Source of fund; Question of law
• Section: 143(3); 234B; 68; 10; 139

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.226/IND/2010 A.Y.2006-07 M/S GOEL & GOEL ITARSI PAN AAFFG3612E APPELLANT VS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1), BHOPAL RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI H.P. VERMA AND SHRI ASHISH GOYAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.K.MITRA O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 12.1.2010 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A)-I IS CO NTRARY TO LAW, MATERIALLY INCORRECT AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW AS WE LL AS ON FACTS. THE FINDING AND CONCLUSION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AR E ALSO CONTRARY 2 TO THE MATERIAL, OPPOSED TO THE FACTS, EQUITY AND L AW. THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS BAD IN LAW. THE SAME BE KIND LY QUASHED. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) CIT(A)-1 HAS ERRED IN LAW AN D WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING PROPER, MEANINGFUL AND REASONABLE OPPOR TUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT AND WITHOUT INFORMING ABOUT THE DECISION CITED BY HIM IN THE BODY OF ORDER. THEREFORE, THE O RDER IS BAD IN LAW AND DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. 3. THE LD. LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN TREATING UNSECURED LOANS OF RS. 13,90,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED C REDIT U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND ADDED THE SAME IN THE TOTAL INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL, INSPITE OF THE FACT THAT ALL THE CREDITORS WERE EXAMINED AND ALL OF THEM HAD GIVEN THEIR STATE MENT AND CONFIRMED THE CREDITS BEFORE THE LD. A.O. 4. THAT THE LD. LOWER AUTHORITIES WERE NOT JUSTIFIE D IN REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WITHOUT INVOKING THE PROVISIONS O F SECTION 145(3) OF THE I.T. ACT AND MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS AND DI SALLOWANCES. THEREFORE, THE FOLLOWING DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE L D. A.O. AND THEREAFTER SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ARE UNLAWFUL AND NOT JUSTIFIED. A. DISALLOWANCE OF TELEPHONE AND VEHICLE EXPENSES RS.10,000/- 5. THE LD. LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED AND WERE NO T JUSTIFIED IN LEVYING PENAL INTEREST U/S 234(B) AND (C). THEY FU RTHER ERRED IN 3 INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T. ACT. ALL THE ABOVE LEVY AND INITIATION ARE BAD AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW. HENCE, MAY KINDLY BE DELETED. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, WE HAVE HEARD SHR I H.P. VERMA AND SHRI ASHISH GOYAL, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI P.K. MITRA, LEARNED SR. DR. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS GROUND NOS. 1,2 AND 4, THEREFORE, THESE GROU NDS ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. GROUND NO. 5 FOR LEVYING PENAL INTERES T U/S 234B AND WAS WAS ARGUED TO BE CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE. 3. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND ARGUED BY THE LD. CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PERTAINS TO TREATING UNSECURED LOANS OF RS .13,90,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LOAN WAS RECEIVED FROM 5 M EMBERS OF CHOURASIA FAMILY THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL AND IDENTI TY, GENUINENESS AND CREDIT WORTHINESS WAS DULY ESTABLISHED. THE P ARTIES CLAIMED TO HAVE CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE RETURNS OF ALL THE PARTI ES FOR THREE YEARS WERE DULY FILED BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT. OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO PAGE 28 OF THE PAPER BOOK SHOWING THE BO OKS OF ACCOUNTS OF SHRI CHANDRAKANT CHOURASIA AS THE LOAN WAS TAKEN FR OM HIM BY CHEQUE. AT PAGE 29 THE CONFIRMATION LETTER, PAGE 30, RETURN S OF INCOME AT PAGE 31 THERE IS A BALANCE-SHEET WHEREIN THE LOAN TO THE AS SESSEE WAS REFLECTED. AT PAGES 32 TO 35 THE RETURNS OF EARLIER YEARS WERE AVAILABLE FOR WHICH 4 OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED. IDENTICALLY THE LOAN WA S CLAIMED TO BE FROM REMAINING MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY FOR WHICH OUR ATTEN TION WAS INVITED TO PAGES 36 AND 37 OF THE PAPER BOOK. A PLEA WAS ALSO RAISED THAT THE BALANCE-SHEET FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31.3.2003 (PAPER B OOK PAGE 35) SHOWS THAT MR. CHANDRAKANT CHOURASIA GAVE LOAN TO S AWARIA GLOBEFIN, ITARSI, AT RS.2,24,000/- AND IN TURN, THE LOAN WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE OUT OF THAT MONEY. IDENTICALLY, THE SOURCE OF LOAN BY OTHER PARTIES WAS FROM REPAYMENT OF LOAN BY SAWARIA GLOFIN. IT WAS AL SO PLEADED THAT THE AMOUNT WAS RETURNED BACK TO THE PARTIES ALONG WITH OTHER LOANS RECEIVED BY THEM AND THEIR STATEMENT WAS RECORDED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER WHEREIN THEY CONFIRMED THE TRANSACTIONS. RELIANCE W AS PLACED ON THE DECISION IN ROHINI BUILDERS; 127 TAXMAN 523 (GUJ) A ND METACHEM INDUSTRIES; 245 ITR 160 (MP). THE RETURNS OF LENDER S WERE ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED SENIOR DEPARTMEN TAL REPRESENTATIVE CONTENDED THAT THE IMPUGNED AMOUNTS IN THE FORM OF LOAN WAS DEPOSITED ONE DAY PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CHE QUE I.E. CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF CHOURASIA FAMILY O N 31.8.2005 AND THE CHEQUE FOR THE LOAN WERE ISSUED ON 1.9.2005. RELIA NCE WAS PLACED ON THE DECISION IN 208 ITR 465 (CAL), 187 ITR 597 (CAL ), 286 ITR 548 (P&H) AND 271 ITR 390 (DEL). OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO INVI TED TO PAGE 5 (PARA 3.4) OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 5 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVES INCOME FROM RAILWAY CATER ING BUSINESS, DISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.5,91,000/- ALONG WITH COPY O F AUDITED BALANCE- SHEET, PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND AUDIT REPORT. TH E CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY WHEREIN THE INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS. 20,46,000/- VIDE ORDER DATED 24.12.2008 FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT , AFTER MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS INCLUDING THE ADDITION OF RS.13,9 0,000/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT DISBELIEVING THE GENUINENESS OF THE CREDIT. ON APPEAL THE ADDITIONS WERE CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS) WHICH IS UNDER CHALLENGE BEFORE US. THE ASSESSEE F IRM RECEIVED LOAN OF RS.13,90,000/- FROM MEMBERS OF CHOURASIA FAMILY WH ICH ARE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER :- LOAN FROM AMOUNT (RS. RETURN FOR 3 AYS CONFIRM ATION COPY OF ACCOUNTS BANK PASS BOOK OF ASSESSEE SHOWING LOAN AND REPAYMENT SHRI CHANDRAKANT CHOURASIA 1,80,000 PB 30-45 PB 29 PB 28 PAPER BOOK 26-27 SMT. MANISHA CHAURASIA 3,70,000 PB 62 67 PB 61 PB 60 PAPER BOOK 26-27 SMT. RADHA CHAURASIA 3,90,000 PB 54-59 PB 53 PB 52 PAPER BOOK 26-27 SHRI VIJAYKANT CHAURASIA 2,50,000 PB 38-43 PB 37 PB 36 PAPER BOOK 26-27 SHRI KRISHNAKANT CHAURASIA 2,00,000 PB 46-51 PB 45 PB 44 PAPER BOOK 26-27 TOTAL 13,90,000 6 IT IS SEEN THAT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS N OT DOUBTED THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS BUT HAS DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS ON THE PLEA THAT PARTIES HAD DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT IN T HEIR RESPECTIVE BANK ACCOUNTS ONE DAY PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CHEQUE, T HEREFORE, THEIR CREDIT WORTHINESS WAS SUSPECTED. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT TRANSACTION IS THROUGH BANKING CH ANNEL, TRANSACTION WAS CONFIRMED, THE LENDER PARTIES ARE INCOME TAX AS SESSEES, THEREFORE, THE ONUS CAST ON THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISCHARGED. 6. IF THE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE FACTS A RE ANALYSED, IT IS SEEN THAT THE RETURNS OF THE LENDERS WERE FILED PRI OR TO THE DATE OF LOAN AND IN THE RESPECTIVE ACCOUNTS SOME CASH AND CAPITA L BALANCE ON VARIOUS DATES IS AVAILABLE. IN THE CASE OF CHANDRA KANT CHOURASIA THE RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 WAS FILED ON 24.3.2004 (PAPER BOOK PAGE 34) ACCOMPANIED BY BALANCE-SHEET. IN THE BALANCE-SHEET CAPITAL AMOUNT OF RS.3,48,830/- WAS AVAILABLE AND C ASH BALANCE OF RS.27,270/- WAS REFLECTED. THE AMOUNT OF RS.2,24,0 00/- GIVEN TO SAWARIA GLOFIN AS A LOAN WAS ALSO REFLECTED. THE R ETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 WAS FILED ON 11.8.2005 (PAP ER BOOK PAGE 32) ACCOMPANIED BY BALANCE-SHEET (PAPER BOOK PAGE 33) W HICH SHOWS CAPITAL OF RS.3,01,620/- AND CASH BALANCE OF RS.1,6 6,760/-. THE LOAN WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE ON 1.9.2005 WHICH WAS ALS O REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE-SHEET ENDED ON 31.3.2006. EVEN AFTER THIS DATE THE CASH OF RS. 7 4,47,662/- WAS REFLECTED. THE GENUINENESS OF TRAN SACTION AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF LOAN CREDITORS WERE NOT ESTABLISHED S INCE THE EXACT AMOUNT OF LOAN GIVEN BY VARIOUS FAMILY MEMBERS OF SAWARIA GROUP WAS DEPOSITED IN CASH IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT JUST ONE DA Y PRIOR TO ISSUE OLF CHEQUE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LOAN WAS ALSO ALLEGED TO BE GIVEN FREE OF INTEREST WHEREAS FINANCIAL POSITIONOF THE VARIOUS F AMILY MEMBERS OF CHOURASIA FAMILY GROUP WAS NOT ESTABLISHED. SOURCE OF CAPITAL IN THE HANDS OF CHANDRAKANT CHOURASIA WAS THROUGH WILL REC EIVED FROM SMT. ARUNA CHOURASIYA. WHETHER CASH WAS RECEIVED THROUG H WILL OR SOME PROPERTY WAS RECEIVED REMAINED TO BE UNEXPLAINED. ON QUESTIONING BY THE BENCH REGARDING THE COPY OF STATEMENT OF ACCOUN TS OF SAWARIA GROUP, ITARSI, NOTHING WAS PRODUCED BEFORE US. THE APPREHENSION OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER REGARDING THE SOURCE OF I MPUGNED AMOUNTS IS AS UNDER :- NAME OF LENDER AMOUNT SHOWN RETURN OF INCOME SOURCE OF FUND SHRI CHANDRAKANT CHOURASIA 180,000 99,750 CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A/C ON 31.08.05 SMT. MANISHA CHOURASIA 370,000 1,19,000 CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A/C ON 31.08.05 SMT. RADHA CHOURASIA 390,000 97,200 CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A/C ON 31.08.05 SHRI VIJAYKANT CHOURASIA 250,000 99,480 CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A/C ON 31.08.05 KRISHNAKANT CHOURASIA 200,000 99,410 CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A/C ON 31.08.05 TOTAL RS. 1,390,000 8 IF THE ABOVE TABLE IS ANALYSED WITH THE ARGUMENTS A DVANCED BY THE LEARNED RESPECTIVE COUNSEL AND THE FACTS AVAILABLE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, IT IS SEEN THAT IDENTICAL AMOUNT OF LOAN WERE DEPOS ITED IN THE RESPECTIVE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE LENDERS ONE DAY PRIOR TO THE I SSUE OF CHEQUE. THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT OF SAWARIA GLOFIN WAS NOT PRODU CED AT ANY STAGE I.E. BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE LEARNED COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND THE TRIBUNAL. ADMITTEDLY, THE ID ENTITY OF THE LENDERS IS NOT IN DISPUTE BUT THE CREDIT WORTHINESS AND THE GE NUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IS UNDER CLOUDS. ONE VIEW IS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT EXPECTED TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF SOURCE BUT AT THE S AME TIME A HEAVY ONUS IS CAST UPON THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THE GEN UINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF THE LENDERS. ALL THE IMPUGNED AMOUNTS AS MENTIONED IN THE AFORESAID TABLE WERE DE POSITED ON 31.8.2005 IN CASH IN THE RESPECTIVE ACCOUNTS OF THE LENDERS WHICH REASONABLY CREATES DOUBT ABOUT GENUINENESS OF THESE AMOUNT FIRSTLY BECAUSE THESE AMOUNTS WERE THE IDENTICAL AMOUNTS WH ICH WERE ISSUED IN THE FORM OF CHEQUE AND SECONDLY CASH WAS DEPOSIT ED JUST ONE DAY PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CHEQUE. THE LENDERS ARE C LOSE RELATIVES AND THE INTEREST FREE LOANS WERE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE E SPECIALLY WHEN THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY OF THE CHOURASIA GROUP IS NOT VE RY SOUND. IT IS ALSO NOT EXPLAINED AS TO WHY A BIG AMOUNT OF RS.13,90,000/- WAS KEPT IN CASH AT HOME BY CHOURASIA FAMILY AND THE SAME WAS DEPOSITED IN THE RESPECTIVE 9 ACCOUNTS FOR PROVIDING LOAN. IF THE RETURNS OF INC OME OF THE RESPECTIVE MEMBERS OF CHOURASIA FAMILY IS ANALYSED, IT DOES NO T PROVE THE GOOD FINANCIAL CAPACITY TO GIVE LOAN. NO PERSONAL BALAN CE-SHEET WAS FILED WITH THE RETURN U/S 139 OF THE ACT. THE SOURCE OF INCOM E OF THE FEMALE MEMBERS OF CHOURASIA FAMILY ARE INCOME FROM MACHINE RENT AND COACHING CLASSES AND THEY ARE FILING THE RETURNS AT NIL. THE SOURCE OF FUNDS OF ABOVE FAMILY MEMBERS APPEARS TO BE NON-GEN UINE, THEREFORE, IT APPEARS TO BE CASE OF PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY TO THE ASSESSEE. THIS VIEW IS SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION FROM HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SETHI COTTON TRADERS V. I TO (2006) 286 ITR 548 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINES S OF COMMISSION AGENT AND SALE/PURCHASE OF PESTICIDES AND FERTILIZE RS. DURING THE YEAR, THE ASSESSEE INTRODUCED A SUM OF RS.50,000 IN THE N AME OF SK SON OF SB AS A DEPOSIT. ON A CONSIDERATION OF THE EXPLANA TION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE CASH CREDIT, IT WAS FOUND AS A FAC T BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ALLEGED CREDITOR WAS NOT IN A CAPA CITY TO DEPOSIT THE LOAN WITH THE ASSESSEE FIRM AND IT WAS IN FACT AN ENTRY ARRANGED BY THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF AND ROUTED THROUGH SK. IT WAS FURTHER FOUND THAT A SUM OF RS. 50,000 WAS DEPOSITED IN CASH IN THE SAVI NGS BANK ACCOUNT OF SK ON AUGUST 3, 1990 AND ON THE SAME DAY A CHEQUE FOR THE SAME AMOUNT WAS ISSUED BY SK IN FAVOUR OF THE A SSESSEE. KEEPING THIS FACT IN VIEW, THE AMOUNT OF RS.50,000 SHOWN AS CREDIT IN THE 10 ACCOUNT OF SK WAS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED AND ADDITI ON TO THAT EFFECT WAS MADE U/S 68 OF THE INCOMETAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1991-92. THIS WAS UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNAL. ON APPE AL TO THE HIGH COURT, IT WAS HELD THAT THE FINDINGS WERE CLEARLY FINDINGS OF FACT RECORDED CONCURRENTLY BY ALL THE AUTHORITIES. THE ISSUES RAI SED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT QUESTIONS OF LAW. THE ADDITION WAS HELD T O BE JUSTIFIED. IN THE CASE OF PREMNATH GOYAL & CO. VS. CIT (271 IT R 390) (DEL), IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: HELD, DISMISSING THE APPEAL, THAT ON A CONSIDERATION OF THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH INCLUDED THE STATEMENT OF THE THREE CREDITORS, THE TRIBUNAL HAD COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SATISFACTORY, INASMUCH AS, THE THREE CREDITORS WERE PERSONS OF SMALL MEANS; THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF THE AVAILABILITY OF THE AMOUNT OF RS.3 LACS WITH THEM ON THE DATES OF THE DEPOSIT WITH THE ASSESSEE; AND THE DRAFTS FOR THE MONEY PURPORTEDLY GIVEN BY THE CREDITORS IN CASH WERE OBTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE TRIBUNAL WAS JUSTIFIED IN DISALLOWING INTEREST ON THE CREDITS. THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL BEING BASED ON COGENT MATERIAL, NO QUESTION OF LAW MUCH LESS A SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AROSE FROM ITS ORDER. IN ANOTHER CASE OF CIT VS. UNITED COMMERCIAL & INDU STRIAL CO. PVT. LTD. (187 ITR 596), THE HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT HELD THAT IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS AND MERE PRODUCTION OF THE 11 CONFIRMATION LETTERS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER W OULD NOT BY ITSELF PROVE THAT THE LOANS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED FROM THOSE LOAN CREDITORS OR THAT THEY HAVE CREDITWORTHINESS. 7. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MAINLY RELIED U PON THE DECISION FROM HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. M ETACHEM INDUSTRIES (245 ITR 160) (MP), ON THE FINDING OF CIT(A) AND TH E TRIBUNAL THAT THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE FIRM REGARDING CREDIT ENTR IES WAS SATISFACTORY, IT WAS HELD THAT THE CASH CREDITS ARE NOT ASSESSABLE I N THE HANDS OF THE FIRM U/S 68 OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, IN THE PRESENT APP EAL, SINCE THE IMPUGNED AMOUNTS WERE DEPOSITED IN CASH IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF DIFFERENT FAMILY MEMBERS OF CHOURASIA GROUP, ONE DA Y PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CHEQUE, THEREFORE, THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE L ENDERS IS VERY MUCH IN DOUBT. HOWEVER, BEFORE US, THE CASH ACCOUNT OF M/S. SAWARIA GLOFIN WAS NOT PRODUCED AT ANY STAGE AND THE IMPUGNED AMOUNTS WERE DEPOSITED IN CASH JUST ONE DAY PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CHEQUE, THER EFORE, WE REMAND THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER TO E XAMINE THE ISSUE WITH REGARD TO PAYMENTS MADE, IF ANY, BY SAWARIA GROUP T O THE LENDERS ALONG WITH THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY OF THE LENDERS AS THE S OURCE OF INCOME OF LADY MEMBERS OF THE CHOURASIA FAMILY IS IN DOUBT OR NOT AVAILABLE BEFORE US. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTI CAL PURPOSES ONLY. AS FAR AS GROUND PERTAINS TO LEVYING INTEREST U/S 234B & 234C, IT IS 12 CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE AND THE ISSUE OF INITIATING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1) OF THE ACT IS PREMATURE. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 24 TH FEBRUARY, 2011. (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 24 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, G UARD FILE DN/-