ITO, PALI V. Shri Hemant Murlidhar Parihar, PALI

ITA 24/JODH/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 2423314 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 29-04-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N A JOSHI
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Gift; Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure
• Section: 244A; 234B

Judgement Text

IN TH E INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL : JODHPUR BENCH : JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA NO S .442 & 443 /JODH/201 2 (A.Y. 200 7 - 08 & 2008 - 09 ) SHRI HEMANT MURLIDHAR PARIHAR , VS. ITO, WARD - 1, 8 WHITE HOUSE, TOWN HALL, PALI. PALI . PAN NO. AKWPP 6056 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO . 24 /JODH/201 2 (A.Y. 200 8 - 0 9 ) ITO, WARD - 1, VS. SHRI HEMANT MURLIDHAR PARIHAR MAN DIA ROAD, PALI . PROP. M/S. ADITYA DISTRIBUTORS PROP. M/S. AKSHAR C OMMUNICATION, 8 WHITE HOUSE, TOWN HALL ROAD , P ALI. PAN NO. AKWPP 6056 F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S HRI AMIT KOTHARI DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI N.A. JOSHI - D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 17 / 0 7 /201 4 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 /0 7 /201 4 . 2 O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA , J .M SINCE THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEALS HAVE BEEN HEARD TOGETHER AND INVOLVE ALMOST IDENTICAL GROUNDS, WE ARE PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE THEM OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, CONGRUENCE AND BREVITY. ITA NO. 44 2/JU /2013 2. TH IS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2007 - 08 DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01 / 11 /201 2 OF L D . CIT(A), JODHPUR . THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 40,700/ - FOR ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED AGRICULTURE INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ADDITION SO SUSTAINED IS BAD IN LAW AND BAD ON FACTS. 2 . THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,15,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT. THE ADDITION SO SUSTAINED IS BAD IN LAW AND BAD ON FACTS. 3 3. THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S 234B AND 234D AND WITHDRAWAL OF INTE REST U/S 244A IS BAD IN LAW AND BAD ON FACTS. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LIBERTY TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER, AND MODIFY ANY OF THE GROUND OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE ITS HEARING BEFORE YOUR HONOUR. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CARRIES ON THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN PURCHASE AND SALE OF SIM CARDS AND RECHARGE COUPONS. FOR A.Y. 2007 - 08, HE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME [ROI] ON 5.10.2007 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,52,950 / - . BESIDES THIS, THE ASSESSEE ALSO DISCLOSED AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 1,90,700/ - AS AGAINST WHICH ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 16,64,650/ - AND COMPUTED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNDER: TOTAL INCOME AS PER COMPUTATION 1,52,950/ - ADD. 1. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAXES TREATING IT AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AS DISCUSSED ABOVE 2. AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT OUT OF INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AS DISCUSSED ABOVE 3. AMOUNT RECEIVED AS GIFT, TAXED AS INCOME FROM UNDISC LOSED SOURCES AS DISCUSSED ABOVE 1,90,700/ - 9,21,000 / - 4,00,000 / - TOTAL TAXABLE INCOME RS. 16,64,650/ - 4 AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN PART RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE IS FURTHER AGGRIEVED AND HAS FILED THIS SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. 4. FACTS APROPOS GROUND NO. 1 ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 1,90,700/ - FOR TAX PURPOSES. THE ASSESSEE HAS ESTIMATED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME ON THE BASIS OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT. THIS ACCOUNT WAS NOT FOUND TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES AS DETAILS OF CROPS PRODUCED WERE NOT KEPT. AFTER CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS MINOR DETAILS REGARDING USE OF KHAD, DAP, UREA ETC., AND AFTE R CONSIDERING EXPENSES OF PESTICIDE, TRACTOR, ELECTRICITY, DIESEL AND LABOUR ETC, THE A.O. HAS TREATED THE ENTIRE INCOME OF RS. 1,90,700/ - AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. AS AGAINST THIS, KEEPING IN MIND THE ASSESSEE OWNED 42 BIGHAS OF AGRICULTURAL LA ND WHICH IS IRRIGATED AND IN THE PAST ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED AGRICULTURAL INCOME WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. HE HAS ESTIMATED AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS. 1,50,000/ - . THE BALANCE INCOME OF RS. 40,700/ - HAS BEEN SUSTAINED AS ADDITION TO B E FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER AGGRIEVED. 5 4.1 BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE REITERATED THEIR EARLIER ARGUMENTS WHICH WERE TAKEN FROM THE VERY BEGINNING FROM BOTH THE SIDES. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE HAVE FOUND THAT IN O THER A.YS INCLUDING A.Y. 2006 - 07 TO 2012 - 13, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN AGRICULTURAL INCOME WHICH IS REFLECTED IN THE FOLLOWING CHART AS UNDER: A.Y. AGRICULTURAL INCOME 1. 2006 - 07 1,73,000/ - 2 2007 - 08 1,90,700/ - 3 2008 - 09 1,81,000/ - 4 2009 - 10 2,02,710/ - 5 2010 - 11 1,17,350/ - 6 2011 - 12 1,97,750/ - 7 2012 - 13 1,73,000/ - WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GOT 48 BIGHAS OF IRRIGATED LAND AND THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED INCOME OF RS. 3,973/ - PER BIGHA PER YEAR. IT HAS NOT BEEN DENIED BY THE REVENUE THAT EITHER THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT OWN THIS AGRICULTURAL LAND OR THAT IT IS NOT IRRIGATED LAND OR THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT GROW CROPS THEREON. COPY OF GIRDWARI WAS PLACED ON RECORD INDICATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD GROWN WHEAT, RAIDA, JOWAR, ETC. WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CARRYING ON AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES ON 6 HIS LAND MEASURING 48 BIGHAS ON IRRIGATED LAND. THE INCOME SHOWN AT RS. 3,973/ - PER BIGHA PER YEAR IS NOT ON HIGHER SIDE. THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME BEING EXEMPT FROM TAX, IT MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE FOR AN AGRICULTURIST TO KEEP HIS ACCOUNTS IN THE SAME MANNER, WHI CH IS KEPT BY REGULAR BUSINESS MAN. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE A.O. HAS GONE STRICTLY ON ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES TO DISALLOW ENTIRE INCOME. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS MADE A LUMPSUM ESTIMATION OF INCOME WITHOUT ANY REASONING AS TO HOW THE INCOME DISCLOSED BY T HE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT BE ACCEPTED. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRETY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, PARTICULARLY THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE GROWS BOTH CROPS, I.E., KHARIFF AND RABI, AND LAND IS IRRIGATED, WE CANNOT IGNORE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSES SEE AND THEREFORE, WE ACCEPT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME SHOWN AND ALLOW GROUND NO. 1 PARTICULARLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE PAST HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE ABOVE CHART. WE ORDER TO DELETE THE REMAINING SUSTAINED ADDITION OF RS. 40.700/ - FROM THE ASSESSEES HANDS. 6. FACTS APROPOS GROUND NO, 2 OF ASSESSEE'S APPEAL WHICH PERTAIN TO ADDITION OF RS. 8,15,000/ - ADDED ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ARE THAT THE A.O. NOTICED CERTAIN DEPOSITS IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT OPENED WITH THE SBBJ AND ICICI, PALI. WHEN ASKED TO 7 EXPLAIN THE SOURCE THEREOF, IT WAS STATED THAT THESE DEPOSITS ARE OUT OF HIS AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF EARLIER YEARS. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RAISED SOME AGRICULTURAL LOANS WHICH WERE ALSO DEPOSI TED IN THE BANK. HOWEVER, THE A.O. WAS NOT AGREEABLE AND HAD DISALLOWED THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS. 9,21,000/ - . IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SUSTAINED ADDITION OF RS. 8,15,000/ - OUT OF THESE DEPOSITS BY ACCEPTING DEPOSIT OF RS. 1 LAKHS MADE ON 5.2.22007 OU T OF LOAN TAKEN FROM MGB. 6.1 BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE REITERATED THEIR EARLIER ARGUMENTS WHICH WERE TAKEN BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE DETAILS OF EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RELATION TO CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT HAS BEEN SUMMARIZED AS UNDER: DATE AMOUNT PARTICULARS 2/04/2006 1000 OUT OF SAVING AND CASH BALANCE 09/10/2006 20000 OUT OF WITHDRAWAL FROM SBBJ ACCOUNT. 09/10/2006 5000 - DO - 26/10/2006 60000 OUT OF SALES OF AGRICULTURE PRODUCE RAIDA SALES WHICH WAS WITHDRAWAL BY BANK 26/11/2006 250000 CASH SALES OF WHEAT IN LOOSE AND JAWAR SALES 05/12/2006 250000 SALES OF WHEAT IN LOOSE AND JAWAR SALES. 06/12/2006 130000 SALE OF WHEAT AND OTHER PRODUCE 8 05/02/2007 100000 OUT OF LOAN RECEIVED FROM MGB 01/01/2007 100000 CASH RECEIVED FROM OWN PROPRIETORS FIRM AND REPAID BACK ON 12/01/07 12/01/2007 5000 SELF SAVING AND CASH BALANCE APART FROM THE ABOVE, IT WAS STATED THAT THERE WERE WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT WHICH WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT WAS STATED THAT A OPENING CASH BALANCE OF RS. 1,71,483/ - WAS THERE IN HIS PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET AND RS. 3,32,715/ - IN ASKHSAR COMMUNICATION IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS PROPRIETOR. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE IN M/S ADITYA DISTRIBUTORS WHICH DEALS IN PURCHASE AND SALE OF RECHARGE COUPONS AND SIM CAR DS OF VODAPHONE, IS ABOUT RS. 1.94 CRORES DURING THE YEAR. THE ASSESSEE HAS ABOUT 300 RETAILERS IN PALI DISTRICT TO WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAS TO MAKE SUPPLIES. IT IS CLAIMED THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD DISTRIBUTE THESE RECHARGE COUPONS TO VARIOU S RETAILERS AND COLLECT MONEY ON DAILY BASIS WHICH IS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. HE STATED THAT THE AVERAGE COLLECTION IS ABOUT RS. 3 TO 4 LAKHS WHICH HE DEPOSITED IN VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS AS NO ONE SINGLE BANS WAS ACCEPTING SUCH A HUGE CASH ON DAILY BASIS. THEREFORE, CASH BALANCE EXCEEDING RS. 5 LAKHS REMAINS IN THE BUSINESS CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO REFERRED TO DOCUMENTS REGARDING LOAN TA KEN AS K I S SAN GOLD LOAN DURING THE YEAR AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,40,000/ - AND RS. 2,05,000/ - 9 WHICH WE RE ALSO RECEIVED IN CASH AND WAS AVAILABLE WITH HIM TO BE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK. THEREFORE, THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS. 9.12 LAKHS IS ALLOWABLE. 8. PER CONTRA, THE LD. SR. DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HE HAS REFERRED TO THE CHART E XTRACTED BY THE AO IN HIS ORDER EXHIBITING FEW CASH DEPOSIT ENTRIES IN THE SBBJ AND ICICI BANKS OF THE ASSESSEE OPENED IN PALI. HE HAS STATED THAT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT DEPOSITS ARE OUT OF SELF SAVINGS AND FROM CASH RECEIVED ON SALE OF AGRI CULTURAL PRODUCE. 9. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. AR OF THE APPELLANT. IN SO FAR AS DEPOSITS OF RS. 1000/ - AND OF RS. 5000/ - MADE ON 12.4.2006 IN SBBJ AND 12.1.2007 IN THE ICICI B ANK RESPECTIVELY, THEY HAVE BEEN TREATED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AS EXPLAINED. HE IS FAIR ENOUGH IN DOING SO, AS THESE AMOUNTS COULD BE TREATED AS EXPLAINED FROM OUT OF SAVINGS AND FROM OUT OF LOANS RECEIVED FROM MGB BANK. THE FACTUM OF LOAN STANDS EXPLAINED O N RECORD. THE SOURCES OF OTHER DEPOSITS HAVE NOT BEEN CLEARLY PROVED. THE STATEMENTS, HERE AND THERE, TO BE OUT OF ALLEGED SALE OF AGRICULTURAL 10 PRODUCE ARE FAR - FETCHED. THEREFORE, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DISMISS GROUND N O. 2 OF THIS APPEAL. 10 . GROUND NO. 3 IS REGARDING CHARGING OF INTEREST U/SS 234B AND 234D OF THE ACT AND WITHDRAWAL OF INTEREST U/S 244A. THE CHARGING AND CLAIM OF INTEREST HA V E TO BE MADE AS PER LAW AND WE DO NOT DIRECTLY ALLOW THIS GROUND BUT DIRECT T HE A.O. TO CONSIDER THIS GROUND IN THE LIGHT OF OUR FINDING GIVEN IN RELATION TO GROUND NOS . 1 AND 2 ABOVE. 11 . ACCORDINGLY, THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2007 - 08 IS PARTLY ALLWOED. ITA NOS.44 3 /JODH/2012 & 24/JU /201 1 2 . THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS FOR A.Y. 2008 - 09 ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 7.11.2012. 11 13 . IN ASSESSEES APPEAL THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 16,000/ - FOR ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED AGRICULTURE INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ADDITION SO SUSTAINED IS BAD IN LAW AND BAD ON FACTS. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,12,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSIT MADE IN KCC AND KGC ACCOUNT AND CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION TO HIS CONCERN. THE ADD ITION SO SUSTAINED IS BAD IN LAW AND BAD ON FACTS. 3. THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S 234B AND 234D AND WITHDRAWAL OF INTEREST U/S 244A IS BAD IN LAW AND BAD ON FACTS. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LIBERTY TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER, AND MODIFY ANY OF THE GROUND OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE ITS HEARING BEFORE YOUR HONOUR. 1 4 . IN REVENUES APPEAL THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED: ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN: - 12 1. RESTRICTING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL IN COME TREATED AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES TO RS. 16,000/ - AS AGAINST RS. 1,81,000/ - MADE BY AO. 2. DELETING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE ON KHAD, TRACTOR, LABOUR ETC. OF RS. 4,78,800/ - 3. RESTRICTING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS MADE IN KISAN CREDIT CARD AND KISAN GOLD CARD A/C AS WELL AS UNEXPLAINED CAPITAL INTRODUCED IN M/S. AKSHAR COMMUNICATION TO RS. 2,12,000/ - AGAINST RS. 4,52,000/ - AND RS. 1,30,000/ - RESPECTIVELY MADE BY AO. 1 5 . GROUND NO. 1 OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS REGARDING AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SUSTAINED ADDITION OF RS. 16,000/ - WITH SIMILAR REASONING AS WE HAVE GIVEN IN A.Y. 2007 - 08, WE HAVE ALLOW ED THIS GROUND AND HAVE ACCEPTED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF R S 1,90,700/ - . IN THIS YEAR, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS 1,81,000/ - - REFER CHART IN PARA 5 AT PAGE 5 OF THIS ORDER. THE FACTS IN THIS REGARD HAVE NOT CHANGED IN THIS YEAR. HENCE WE ORDER TO ALLOW SUSTAINED ADDITION OF RS. 16,000/ - AS WELL . AS A RESULT, GROUND NO. 1 OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED , BUT GROUND NO. 1 OF REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 13 1 4.1 . CONNECTING GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS GROUND NO. 1 WHICH STANDS DISMISSED IN VIEW OF SIMILAR FINDING GIVEN IN A.Y. 2007 - 08. 14 .2 GROUND NO. (2) OF REVENUES APPEAL CANNOT BE ALLOWED FOR THE REASONS THAT SIMILAR EXPENDITURE ON KHAD, TRACTOR, LABOUR, ETC. CLAIMED IN A.Y. 2007 - 08, HAS NOT BEEN ADDED IN ASSESSEES HANDS. RATHER, WE HAVE ACCEPTED AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN TOTO. THEREF ORE, WE CA NNOT ADD THIS EXPENDITURE MAINLY INCURRED ON DESI KHAD ETC. HOWEVER, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DISMISS GROUND NO. 3 OF REVENUES APPEAL. 15. THE FACTS APROPOS GROUND NO. 3 OF REVENUES APPEAL ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD A LOAN ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF KISSAN CREDIT CARD [KCC] AND KISSAN GOLD CARD [KGC] AND KISAN GOLD CARD IN MARWAR GRAMIN BANK. IN THESE ACCOUNTS, CASH DEPOSITS WERE MADE ON VARIOUS DATES, AS UNDER: KISSAN CREDIT CARD DATE AMOUNT JULY 19,2007 220000 DEC. 22, 2007 47000 DEC. 26 2007 148000 TOTAL 415000 14 KISSAN GOLD CARD DATE AMOUNT AUG. 9, 2007 37000 TOTAL 37000 15.1 AS PER THE ASSESSEE, DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT OF CASH IN HAND GENERATED OUT OF SALE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE ON DIFFERENT DATES. THE AO DID NOT FIND THIS EXPLANATION COMPATIBLE WITH THE PROOF ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAINTAIN PERSONAL CASH BOOK AND BANK BOOK. ACCORDINGLY, HE HAS ADDED A SUM OF RS. 4,52,000/ - IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 15.2 FURT HER, IN THE PROPRIETORS ACCOUNT FILED WITH THE AUDIT REPORT OF M/S AKSHAR COMMUNICATION THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN CASH INTRODUCTION OF RS. 1,98,000/ - . AS PER THE ASSESSEE, HE DEPOSITED RS. 1,30,000/ - FROM OUT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. 15.3 PER CONTRA, THE LD . SR. DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 15 15.4 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE CAN ACCEPT THE DEPOSIT OF RS. 1,30,000/ - IN THE PROPRIETORS CAPITAL ACCOUNT FROM OUT OF THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME WHICH WE HAVE ACCEPTED, AS ABOVE , AT RS. 1,81,00/ - . HOWEVER, FOR CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN KIS S AN CREDIT CARDS AND K. GOLD CARD, DO NOT STAND EXPLAINED. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS. 4,52,000/ - DEPOSITED IN CASH IN THE ABOVE ACCOUNTS HAS TO BE TAXED IN ASSESSEES HANDS. ACCORDINGLY, THE LOANS TA KEN FROM MGB ON 24.7.2007 AND 26.7.2007 OF RS. 2,05,000/ - HAVE NOT GOT ANY RELATION WITH THESE DEPOSITS. TALLY OF CHART EXTRACTS ABOVE WITH THE DATES OF THESE LOANS DO NOT MATCH. OTHERWISE ALSO, IT SEEMS TO BE A SUBTERFUGE TO EXPLAIN THESE DEPOSITS. ACC ORDINGLY, WE OVERTURN THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND ADD BACK THE SUM OF RS 4,52,000? - DEPOSITED IN THE KCC AND KGC ACCOUNTS AND PARTLY ALLOW GROUND NO. (3) OF THE REVENUES APPEAL. 16. GROUND NO. 3 IN ASSESSEES APPEAL RELATES TO CHARGI NG OF INTEREST U/S 234B AND 234D ETC. THIS GROUND CANNOT BE ALLOWED KEEPING IN VIEW THE MANDATORY NATURE OF THESE SECTIONS. 17. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 16 18. TO SUM UP, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STAND PARTLY ALLOWED. ( ORDER PRONO UNCED IN THE COURT ON 23 RD JULY , 201 4 ) . SD/ - SD/ - (N.K.SAINI) ( HARI OM MARATHA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 23 RD JU LY , 201 4 . VL/ COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE LD. CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE D.R ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, JODHPUR .