Harisor Goyal, Patiala V. ITO, Patiala

ITA 887/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 88721514 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEPINDER SINGH
• Keywords: Business income; Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES SMC CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT ITA NO. 887/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 SH. HARISOR GOYAL., PROP. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFI CER, M/S GEE-GEE DIGITAL GALLERY, WARD NO. 02, PATIAL A. PATIALA. PAN NO. AEJPG6065Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI DEEPINDER SINGH RESPONDENT BY : MS. RAJINDER KAUR DATE OF HEARING : 19.08.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.09.2015 ORDER PER H.L.KARWA, VP THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), PATIALA DATED 17.09.2014 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2009-10. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS A PPEAL READS AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,65,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS AND ON ACCOUNT OF LOWER HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES WHICH IS NOT JUSTIFIED. ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS, ARBITRARY, OPPOSED AND AGAINST FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN THIS UNTENABLE. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT AS SESSEE IS DISTRIBUTOR OF AIRTEL AND TRADING OF MOBILES. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONS IDERATION THE ASSESSEE HAS 2 RAISED UNSECURED LOANS OF RS. 19,56,845/- FROM RELA TIVES. ON VERIFICATION OF THESE LOANS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE LOANS ADVANCED BY SHRI ALISHA GOYAL, SMT. PREM LATA AND SMT. RENU GOYAL AGGREGATI NG TO RS. 5,65,000/- WERE NOT GENUINE. SMT. ALISHA GOYAL (SISTER-IN-LAW) OF T HE ASSESSEE ADVANCED A LOAN OF RS. 84,000/- TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UND ER CONSIDERATION. A SUM OF RS. 19,000/- WAS ADVANCED BY HER IN CASH AND BALANC E OF RS. 65,000/- WAS ADVANCED THROUGH CHEQUE DATED 17.6.2008. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE SAME DATE I.E. 17.6.2008, CASH OF RS. 65,000 /- WAS DEPOSITED IN THIS ACCOUNT AND THEN CHEQUE OF RS. 65,000/- WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE SOURCES OF THIS CREDIT, THE STATEMENT OF SMT. ALISHA GOYAL WAS RECORDED ON 1.9.2011. AS REGARD THE AMOUNT OF RS. 19,000/-, SMT. ALISHA GOYAL STATED THAT THE SAME WAS ADVANCED ON 7.4.2008 OUT O F TUITION INCOME EARNED DURING THE YEAR. AS REGARDS THE LOAN OF RS. 65,000/ - ADVANCED ON 17.6.2008, THE SOURCES OF THE SAME WAS STATED S UNDER;- (A) RS. 35,000/- WITHDRAWN ON 3.4.2008 FROM THE SAME BANK ACCOUNT. (B) BALANCE OUT OF CURRENT YEARS INCOME FROM TU ITION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATIO N PUT FORTH BY THE ASSESSEE HOLDING THAT A SUM OF RS. 35,000/- WAS ADVANCED BY SMT. ALISHA GOYAL OUT OF AMOUNT WITHDRAWN ON 3.4.2008 BECAUSE THE ABOVE AMOU NT WAS WITHDRAWN BEFORE 2 MONTHS AND THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT I T WAS THE SAME AMOUNT. THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 25,000/- CLAIMED TO BE ADVANC ED OUT OF CURRENT YEAR INCOME FROM TUITION WAS ALSO REJECTED BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER FOR WANT OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OF FICER MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 84,000/- U/S 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (I N SHORT 'THE ACT'). 4. SMT. PREM LATA (MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE) HAS ADVA NCED THE FOLLOWING LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR:- 3 A) RS. 19,000/- IN CASH ON 1.6.2008 B) RS. 2,50,000/- THROUGH CHEQUE ON 29.7.2008 C) RS. 95,000/- THROUGH CHEQUE ON 22.12.2008 THE ASSESSING OFFICER RECORDED THE STATEMENT OF SMT PREM LATA ON 1.9.2011. IN HER STATEMENT SMT. PREM LATA STATED THAT SHE WAS DO ING CUTTING AND TAILORING WORK. AS REGARDS THE AMOUNT FOR RS. 19,000/-WHICH WAS ADVANCED ON 1.6.2008 WAS STATED TO BE OUT OF HER PAST SAVINGS. ACCORDIN G TO ASSESSING OFFICER, NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE SAME WAS FURNISHED BY HER. TH E ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SH OW THAT SMT. PREM LATA WAS ACTUALLY DOING CUTTING AND TAILORING WORK. AS REGAR DS LOAN OF RS. 2,50,000/-, A SUM OF RS. 2,30,000/- WAS DEPOSITED IN CASH ON 29.7 .2008 AND CHEQUE FOR RS. 2,50,000/- WAS ISSUED BY SMT. PREM LATA TO THE ASSE SSEE ON THE SAME DATE. SIMILARLY, CASH OF RS. 98,000/- WAS DEPOSITED ON 22 .12.2008 AND CHEQUE FOR RS. 95,000/- WAS ISSUED BY SMT. PREM LATA TO THE ASSESS EE ON THE SAME DATE I.E. 22.12.2008. WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE SOURCES OF THOSE CASH DEPOSITS BEFORE ISSUING CHEQUES, SMT. PREM LATA STATED THAT SHE MADE SUFFIC IENT WITHDRAWALS FROM APRIL TO MAY 2008 AND ABOVE DEPOSITS WERE MADE IN THE BAN K OUT OF THOSE WITHDRAWALS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT T HE EXPLANATION OF THE LOAN CREDITOR OBSERVING THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS WERE MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OUT OF WITHDRAWALS FROM THE SAME ACCOUNT BECAUSE RS. 2,30, 000/- WAS DEPOSITED AFTER 2 MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF WITHDRAWALS AND RS. 95,00 0/- WAS DEPOSITED AFTER SEVEN MONTHS. ACCORDING TO ASSESSING OFFICER THE LO AN CREDITOR DID NOT FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE FACT THAT IT WAS THE SAME AMOUNT WHICH HAS BEEN REDEPOSIT IN THIS ACCOUNT. FURTHER, LOAN CREDITOR ALSO FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF RS. 19,000/- ADVANCED ON 1.6.2008. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OPINED THAT THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS HAVE NOT BEEN PROVED AND, THEREFORE, HE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 3,64,000/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 4 5. SMT. RENU GOYAL (WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE) HAS GIVEN A LOAN OF RS. 98,000/- ON 22.12.2008 AND RS. 19,000/- ON 6.6.2008. THE AS SESSING OFFICER ALSO RECORDED THE STATEMENT OF SMT. RENU GOYAL ON 1.9.20 11. SMT. GOYAL STATED THAT SHE IS A GRADUATE AND DIPLOMA HOLDER IN FASHION DES IGNING AND EARNING INCOME OF RS. 12,000/- APPROX FROM THIS BUSINESS. SMT. GOY AL HAS ALSO STATED THAT SHE HAS DEPOSITED THIS AMOUNT OUT OF HER CURRENT YEARS INCOME. AS REGARDS CASH LOAN OF RS. 19,000/-, SMT. RENU GOYAL STATED THAT IT WAS GIVEN OUT OF HER PAST SAVINGS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE STATING THAT THE CREDITOR HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE HER INCOME I.E. DETAILS OF FASHION DESIGNING WORK DONE, IF ANY . THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DOUBTED THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR AND GE NUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED THE SUM OF R S. 1,17,000/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 17.9.2014 CONFIRMED THE ADDITION FOR THE REASONS ST ATED IN PARA 4.2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. I HAVE HEARD SHRI DEEPINDER SINGH, LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE AND MS. RAJINDER KAUR, LD. DR AT LENGTH AND HAVE ALSO PERUS ED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SHRI DEEPENDER SINGH, LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND F URTHER SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE CREDITORS WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICE R WITH IDENTITY PROOF AND THEY HAD CONFIRMED THE DEPOSITS OF AMOUNTS ALONG WI TH SOURCES OF THEIR INCOME. SHRI DEEPINDER SINGH, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT NO DISCREPANCY HAD BEEN NOTICED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER OR BY THE CIT(A) AND THE ADDITION WAS MADE ON SUSPICION. BOTH THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW HAVE OBSERVED THAT 5 CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WERE MADE OUT OF EARLIER WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK. BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE NOTED TH AT IN CASE OF SMT. ALISHA GOYAL, THE AMOUNT OF RS. 35,000/- WAS WITHDRAWN ABO UT 2 MONTHS BACK.. SIMILARLY, IN THE CASE OF SMT. PREM LATA, IT WAS N OTED THAT RS. 2,30,000/- WAS DEPOSITED ALMOST 2 MONTHS BACK AND RS. 95,000/- AF TER SEVEN MONTHS. ON THE ABOVE GROUND, THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES DOUBTED THE G ENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE NOT G IVEN ANY FINDINGS THAT THE WITHDRAWALS MADE FROM BANK BY THE DEPOSITORS WERE I NVESTED SOMEWHERE ELSE, OR IN ANY ASSETS PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY HAVE NOT DOUBT ED EARLIER WITHDRAWALS FROM BANK. SHRI DEEPINDEAR SINGH LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE GAP OF 2 MONTHS BETWEEN WITHDRAWALS AND D EPOSITS CANNOT BE MADE BASIS FOR MAKING THE ADDITION. MOREOVER, ALL THE DE POSITORS CONFIRMED HAVING GIVEN THE DEPOSITS TO THE ASSESSEE IN THEIR RESPECT IVE STATEMENT RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SHRI DEEPINDER SINGH LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS PROVED SATISFACTORILY THE SOURCE AND NATURE OF DEPOSITS. FURTHERMORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR, THE CAPACITY OF THE CREDITOR TO ADVANCE MONEY; AND THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS. ALL THE DEPOSITORS HAVE EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF DEP OSITS. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING THE ADDITION. IN MY OPINION THERE IS A MERIT IN THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN CASE OF LOAN TAKEN FROM SMT. ALISHA GOYAL WHO IS SISTER-IN-LAW OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS CLAIMED THAT SHE HAS GIVEN A LOAN O F RS. 84,000/- AND OUT OF THIS RS. 19,000/- HAS BEEN GIVEN IN CASH AND RS. 65,000 THROUGH CHEQUE. IN HER STATEMENT, SMT. ALISHA GOYAL HAS STATED AS UNDER:- Q. 1 PLEASE INDENTIFY YOURSELF? 6 ANS. I AM ALISHA GOYAL W/O SHRI JAININDER GOYAL R/O SCF 9, URBAN ESTATE-I, PATIALA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS. Q PLEASE STATE YOUR NATURE OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIO N? ANS. I AM DOING TUITION WORK UP TO MIDDLE. THE JOB IS PROVIDED BY ME AT MY RESIDENCE. I AM DOING THIS WORK FOR THE LA ST 4 5 YEARS. I AM B.COM. I AM EARNING RS. 8000 -9000 PM FROM THIS BUSINESS. I HAVE NO OTHER INCOME EXCEPT THIS. ABOUT 16 17 STU DENTS TOOK TUITION FROM ME. Q. 3 WHETHER YOU HAVE MAINTAINED ANY BANK ACCOUNT? ANS. I AM HAVING BANK ACCOUNT WITH SBOP THAI BR. PA TIALA SAVING A/C NO. 650086232624. Q. 4 WHETHER YOU ARE ASSESSED TO INCOME TAX? ANS. NO. Q.5 WHETHER YOU HAVE GIVEN ANY LOAN TO ANY ONE DURI NG FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. ANS I HAVE GIVEN A LOAN OF RS. 84000/- TO SH. HARIS OR GOYAL DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. Q. 6 WHAT WAS THE SOURCE OF ADVANCING LOAN? ANS. I HAVE GIVEN LOAN OUT OF PAST SAVINGS AND CURR ENT INCOME. Q.7 A PERUSAL OF YOUR BANK ACCOUNT REVEALS THAT ON 17.6.2008 YOU HAVE DEPOSITED CASH OF RS. 65,000/- AND TRANSFERRED THIS AMOUNT ON THE SAME DATE TO SHRI HARISOR GOYAL. PLEASE STATE F ROM WHAT SOURCE THIS CASH HAS BEEN DEPOSITED? ANS. A WITHDRAWAL OF RS. 35,000/- WAS MADE FROM THE SAME SAVING ACCOUNT AND BALANCE AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED OUT OF CUR RENT INCOME. Q. 8 YOU HAVE GIVEN A LOAN OF A SUM OF RS. 19,000/- ON 7.4.2008 TO SHRI HAISON GOYAL. WHAT WAS THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT? ANS. IT WAS DEPOSITED OUT OF TUITION INCOME EARNED DURING THE YEAR. Q.9 WHETHER ANY INTEREST HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY YOU? ANS. YES I HAVE RECEIVED INTEREST OF RS. 8,417/- @ 12 % P.A. 7 RO & AC/- SD/- ALISHA GOYAL FROM THE ABOVE STATEMENT, IT IS CLEAR THAT SMT. ALI SHA GOYAL IS DOING TUITION WORK AND SHE IS B.COM. SHE HAS ALSO STATED THAT HER EARNING FROM TUITION WORK IS RS. 8,000 9,000/- PER MONTH. IN RESPONSE TO Q.NO.5, SMT. ALISHA GOYAL HAS CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT SHE HAS GIVEN A LOAN OF RS. 84,000/- TO THE ASSESSEE DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. SHE HAS ALSO STATED THAT THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION WAS GIVEN OUT OF PAST SAVINGS AND CURRENT YEARS INCOME. SHE HAS CATEGORICALLY S TATED THAT OUT OF RS. 84,000/- A SUM OF RS. 19,000/- WAS ADVANCED ON 7.4.2008 TO T HE ASSESSEE OUT OF THE INCOME FROM TUITION OF THIS YEAR. IN VIEW OF THE AB OVE, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION IN DOUBTING THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DEPOSITOR A ND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. IT IS WELL SETTLED LAW THAT DOUBT OR SUSPICION HOWSOEVER STRONG, IT CANNOT REPLACE THE REALITY BASED ON THE EVIDENCE. I N MY OPINION, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS. 84,000/ -. ACCORDINGLY, I DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 84,000/-. 9. SMT. PREM LATA IS THE MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. SHE HAD ADVANCED RS . 19,000/- IN CASH AND RS. 2,50,000/- THROUGH CHEQUE ON 29.7.2008 AND RS. 95,000/- THROUGH CHEQUE ON 22.12.2008. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO RECORDED TH E STATEMENT OF SMT. PREM LATA, WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW. Q. 1 PLEASE INDENTIFY YOURSELF? ANS. I AM PREM LATE D/O LATE SHRI DES RAJ AGED ABOU T 50 YEARS R/O SCF 9, URBAN ESTATE-I, PATIALA. Q . 2 PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR NATURE OF BUSINESS & PR OFESSION? 8 ANS. I AM DOING CUTTING AND TAILORING WORK FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS. I EARN RS. 5000/- PM APPROXIMATELY FROM THIS BUSINESS . Q. 3 WHETHER YOU ARE HAVING ANY OTHER INCOME APART FORM ABOVE BUSINESS INCOME? ANS. I AM HAVING INTEREST INCOME FROM THE AMOUNT AD VANCED TO G.G. DIGITAL GALLERY AND SHRI GIAN CHAND. Q.4 WHETHER YOU HAVE GIVEN ANY LOAN TO ANY ONE DUR ING FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09? ANS. I HAVE GIVEN A LOAN OF RS. 3,64,000/- ON DIFF ERENT DATES I.E. 1.6.2008 (19,000/-), 29.7.2008 (2,50,000/-) AND 22. 12.2008 (95,000/-) TO SHRI HARISOR GOYAL (SON) PROP. M/S GG .DIGITAL GALLERY, URBAN ESTATE4-I, PATIALA. Q. 5 HOW MUCH INTEREST YOU HAVE CHARGED ON ABOVE LO AN? ANS. I HAVE RECEIVED INTEREST OF RS. 25,035/- WHICH HAS BEEN CHARGED @ 7% PER ANNUM Q. 6 WHAT WAS THE SOURCE OF ADVANCING LOAN TO SHRI HARISOR GOYAL? ANS. THE LOAN WAS ADVANCED OUT OF MY PAST SAVINGS W HICH WERE RETAINED AT HOME. Q. 7 YOU HAVE DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS. 2,30,000/- IN CASH ON 29.7.2008 AND TRANSFERRED RS. 2,50,000/- ON THE SAM E DATE TO SHRI HARISOR GOYAL. AGAIN ON 22.12.2008, YOU HAVE DEPOSI TED A CASH OF RS. 98,000/- AND TRANSFERRED THE SAME TO SHRI HARIS OR GOYAL ON THE SAME DATE. PLEASE STATE FROM WHAT SOURCE THE ABOVE CASH WAS DEPOSITED. ANS. THE AMOUNT OF RS. 2,30,000/- AND RS. 98,000/- WAS DEPOSITED OUT OF WITHDRAWALS FROM THE SAME BANK DURING THE M ONTH APRIL TO MAY. Q. 8 THE ABOVE WITHDRAWALS WERE MADE DURING APRIL TO MAY WHEREAS THE AMOUNTS WERE TRANSFERRED TO HARISOR GOY AL ON 29 JULY AND 22 DECEMBER. WHERE THE AMOUNT WITHDRAWN WAS KEP T AND WHY IT WAS NOT DEPOSITED EARLIER IN THE BANK ACCOUNT FORM TIME TO TIME. 9 ANS. THE AMOUNTS WERE WITHDRAWN TO PURCHASE A PROP ERTY BUT THE DEAL COULD NOT BE MATURE AND THEN THE AMOUNT WAS RE -DEPOSITED FOR GIVING LOAN TO MY SON ON INTEREST. RO & AC/- SD/- PREM LATA FROM THE ABOVE STATEMENT OF SMT. PREM LATA, IT IS C LEAR THAT SHE IS DOING CUTTING AND TAILORING WORK FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS. SHE IS EARRING RS. 5,000/- PER MONTH APPROX. FROM THIS BUSINESS. SHE IS ALSO EARN ING INTEREST INCOME FROM THE AMOUNT ADVANCED TO G.G. DIGITAL GALLERY AND SHRI GI AN CHAND. IN RESPONSE TO Q.NO. 4, SMT PREM LATA HAS CATEGORICALLY STATED TH AT SHE HAS GIVEN A LOAN OF RS. 3,64,000/- ON DIFFERENT DATES I.E 1.6.2008 (RS. 19, 000), ON 28.7.2008( RS. 2,50,000) AND ON 22.12.2008 (RS. 95,000) TO THE ASS ESSEE . SHE HAS ALSO STATED THAT SHE HAD RECEIVED INTEREST OF RS. 25,035/- DURI NG THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. SHE FURTHER STATED THAT THE AMOUNT O F RS. 2,30,000/- AND RS. 98,000/- WAS DEPOSITED OUT OF WITHDRAWALS FROM THE SAME BANK DURING THE MONTH OF APRIL AND MAY AND THE SAME WERE DEPOSITED IN THE MONTHS OF JULY AND DECEMBER. SHE HAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT THE ABOVE AMO UNTS WERE WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK TO PURCHASE A PROPERTY BUT THE DEAL COULD NOT BE MATERIALIZED AND THEN THE AMOUNT WAS RE-DEPOSITED FOR GIVING LOAN TO HIS SON ON INTEREST. AS I HAVE ALREADY OBSERVED HEREIN ABOVE THAT THE DO UBT OR SUSPICION HOWSOEVER STRONG, IT CANNOT REPLACE THE REALITY BAS ED ON THE EVIDENCE. IN MY OPINION, THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,64,000/-- WAS MADE O N THE BASIS OF SURMISES AND CONJECTURE, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,64,000 /- IS DELETED. 10. SMT. RENU GOYAL IS THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE. SHE DEPOSITED RS. 95, 000/- IN CASH ON 22.12.2008 AND ISSUED A CHEQUE OF RS. 98 ,000/- ON THE SAME DATE TO THE ASSESSEE AS LOAN. SHE EXPLAINED THAT THIS AMOUN T OF RS. 95,000/- WAS 10 DEPOSITED OUT OF HER CURRENT YEARS INCOME. FURTHER , CASH LOAN OF RS. 19,000/- WAS GIVEN BY HER WHICH IS CLAIMED TO BE GIVEN OUT O F HER SAVINGS. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER ALSO RECORDED THE STATEMENT OF SMT. RENU GOYAL, WHICH IS REPRODUCED H EREIN BELOW; Q. 1 PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF? ANS. I AM RENU GOYAL W/O SH. HARISOR GOYAL AGED ABO UT 30 YEARS C/O SCF 9, URBAN ESTATE-I, PATIALA. ANS. PLEASE STATE YOUR NATURE OF BUSINESS / PROFESS ION? ANS. I AM A GRADUATE AND DIPLOMA HOLDER IN FASHION DESIGNING. I AM EARNING INCOME OF RS. 12,000/- P.M. APPROXIMAT ELY FORM THE BUSINESS. I HAVE NO OTHER INCOME EXCEPT INTEREST ON LOAN. Q. 3 WHETHER YOU HAVE MAINTAINED ANY BANK ACCOUNT? ANS. I AM MAINTAINING BANK ACCOUNT WITH SBOP THAI BR. PATIALA. Q. 4 WHETHER YOU ARE ASSESSED TO INCOME TAX? ANS. NO. Q.5 WHETHER YOU HAVE GIVEN ANY LOAN TO ANY ONE DURI NG FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. ANS I HAVE GIVEN A LOAN OF RS. 1,17,000/- TO SH. HA RISOR GOYAL DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 IN TWO INSTALLMENTS I .E. RS. 19,000/- ON 6.6.2008 AND RS. 98,000/- ON 22.12.2008. Q. 6 WHAT WAS THE SOURCE OF ADVANCING LOAN TO SH. H ARISOR GOYAL? ANS. I HAVE GIVEN LOAN TO SH. HARSON GOYAL OUT OF PAST SAVINGS AND CURRENT YEARS INCOME. Q.7 AS PER YOUR BANK ACCOUNT YOU HAVE DEPOSITED A S UM OF RS. 95,000/- ON 22.12.2008 AND TRANSFERRED AS UM OF RS. 98,000/- ON THE SAME DATE TO SHRI HARISOR GOYAL AS LOAN. PLEASE STA TE FROM WHAT SOURCE THE CASH OF RS. 95,000/- WAS DEPOSITED ON 22 .12.2008. ANS. I HAVE DEPOSITED THIS AMOUNT OUT OF CURRENT YE ARS INCOME. Q. 8 YOU HAVE GIVEN A LOAN OF A SUM OF RS. 19,000/- ON 6.6.2008 TO SHRI HAISON, GOYAL. PLEASE STATE THE SOURCE OF IT? 11 ANS. IT WAS ADVANCED THIS AMOUNT OUT OF MY PAST SA VINGS. Q.9 WHETHER ANY INTEREST HAS BEEN CHARGED ON THIS L OAN? ANS. YES, I HAVE CHARGED INTEREST @ 12% WHICH WORK S OUT TO RS. 5313/-. RO & AC/- SD/- RENU GOYAL FROM THE ABOVE STATEMENT IT IS EVIDENT THAT SMT. RE NU GOYAL IS GRADUATE AND DIPLOMA HOLDER IN FASHION DESIGNING. SHE IS EAR NING RS. 12,000/- PER MONTH APPROX. FROM THE SAID BUSINESS. IN RESPONSE TO THE Q.NO.5, SHE HAS CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT SHE HAD ADVANCED A LOAN OF RS. 1,17,00 0/- TO HER HUSBAND DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 IN TWO INSTALLMENTS I.E. RS. 19,000/- ON 6.6.2008 AND RS. 98,000/- ON 22.12.2008. SHE HAS ALSO CLARIFIED THAT THE ABOVE DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT OF CURRENT YEARS INCOME. SHE FURTHER EXPL AINED THAT A CASH LOAN OF RS. 19,000/- GIVEN ON 6.6.2008 TO THE ASSESSEE WAS OUT OF HER PAST SAVINGS. SHE HAS ALSO STATED THAT THE LOAN WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE ON INTEREST @ 12% PER ANNUM. FROM THE ABOVE STATEMENT IT IS CLEAR THAT SMT. RENU GOYAL HAS EXPLAINED THE SOURCES OF DEPOSITS. SHE IS A GRADUATE AND DIPLOMA HOLDER IN FASHION DESIGNING. SHE IS EARNING RS. 12,000/- PER MONTH. IN MY OPINIO N, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION IN DOUBTING THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DEPOSITOR AND ALSO THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. ACCORDINGLY, I DELETE THE ADDITION O F RS. 1,17,000/-. FROM THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, IT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR TH AT THE ONUS WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENE SS OF CASH CREDITS HAS BEEN DISCHARGED. THE REVENUE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY COGENT RE ASONS TO DISAPPROVE THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. IN MY ONION, THE REVEN UE AUTHORITIES WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE ARBITRARILY AND WITHOUT ANY VALID GROUND. AT THE SAME TIME IT IS AL SO WELL SETTLED THAT THE REVENUE CANNOT BY MERELY REJECTING UNREASONABLY A G OOD EXPLANATION, CONVERT 12 GOOD PROOF INTO NO PROOF. THUS, CONSIDERING THE EN TIRE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION IN M AKING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,65,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS. ACCORDING LY, I DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,65,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CO NFIRMED BY CIT(A). 11. NO OTHER POINT WAS RAISED OR ARGUED BEFORE THIS BENCH. 12. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.09.2015 SD/- (H.L.KARWA) VICE PRESIDENT DATED : 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2015 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR