SH. Ishwar Dass Garg, Ludhiana V. ACIT, Ludhiana

ITA 977/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90223 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 25-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Gift; Validity of assessment; Accommodation entries; Reason to believe; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 147; 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES SMC CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT ITA NO. 977/CHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03) SH.ISHWAR DASS GARG, VS. THE A.C.I.T., NEAR SHERPUR CHOWK, CIRCLE V, G.T. ROAD, LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN NO. ADXPD6392C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : S/SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL & ASHOK GOYAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 02.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.07.2015 O R D E R PER H.L.KARWA, VP : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIR ECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, LUDHIANA DATED 25.7.2012 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWI NG GROUNDS : 2 1. THAT THE WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS)-LL, LUDHIANA HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN REOPENING OF THE CASE U/S 148 OF THE I.T .ACT, 1961. 2. THAT THE REOPENING IS BAD IN LAW SINCE, THERE IS NO INDEPENDENT APPLICATION OF MIND BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR REOPENING OF TH E CASE U/S 148. 3. NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE SAID FACTS, THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF THE FOLLOWING AMOUNTS TO WARDS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE:- SH.VIPAN KUMAR RS.5,01,250.00 SH.ASHOK KUMAR RS.5,01,250.00 3. VIDE GROUND NOS.1 AND 2 OF THE APPEAL, THE ASSE SSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF THE ASS ESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147/148 R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME T AX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 4. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 20.5.2002 DECLARING THE TOTAL INCOME A T RS.1,74,390/-. THE SAID RETURN WAS PROCESSED U NDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, ON THE B ASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM DIRECTOR OF INVESTIGATION -1, NEW DELHI, PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 147 WERE INITIATED AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 30.3.200 9, WHICH WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE ON SAME DAY. IN RESPO NSE TO THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESS EE SUBMITTED HIS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,74,390/- ON 29.4.2009. DURING THE COURSE OF A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICES U NDER 3 SECTIONS 142(1) AND 143(2) OF THE ACT ALONGWITH QUE STIONNAIRE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 20.1 1.2009 REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THE S UM OF RS.10,02,500/- SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS INVESTMENT FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID QUER Y, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN THE NAMES OF S/SHRI VIPIN KUMAR AND ASHOK KUMAR VINDAL ARE UN SECURED LOANS RECEIVED THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE DRAFT. THE A SSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED FEW DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ON THE BASIS OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINEN ESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE A NY BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENTS OF S/SHRI VIPIN KUMAR AND ASHOK KUMAR VINDAL. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FAILED TO PROVE THE IDEN TITY OF THESE PERSONS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FAILED TO PRODUCE HIS BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. TH E ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS, WHICH IS CAS T ON THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. CONSEQUENTL Y, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.10,02,500/ - UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LE ARNED CIT (APPEALS). THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE VALIDITY O F REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS), AND THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HELD THAT THE REOPENING WAS V ALID. THE 4 RELEVANT FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS ) ARE REPRODUCED HEREINBELOW : 4.3 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE APPELLANTS SUBMIS SIONS. THE AO WHILE REOPENING THE CASE HAD RECORDED THE FOLLOWING R EASONS:- AS PER INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM DIRECTOR OF INVESTIGATIO N (1), NEW DELHI, VIDE NO.4273 DATED 09.03.2006 THROUGH CIT- I, LUDHIANA IT IS FOUND THAT DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR I.E. 2001-02 RE LEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03, THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED B OGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES FOR A TOTAL SUM OF RS.10,02,500 /- FROM SHRI VIPIN KUMAR & SHRI ASHOK KUMAR FROM BANK ACCOUNT NO.8 378 AND 11282 RESPECTIVELY IN JAI LAXMI COOP BANK, FATEHPURI, N EW DELHI AS UNDER :- SR.NO. NAME OF THE PERSONS HAVING BANK ACCOUNT IN YOUR BRANCH BANK A/C NO. DATE AMOUNT IN FAVOUR OF 1. SHRI VIPIN KUMAR 8378 05.03.02 5,01,250/- SHRI IS HWAR DASS GARG, LUDHIANA 2. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR 11282 05.03.02 5,01,250/- SHRI ISHWAR DASS GARG, LUDHIANA AS PER RETURN RECEIPTS DATA AVAILABLE ON COMPUTER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A/Y 2002-03 DECLARING INCOME AT RS.1,74,390/-. IT IS THEREFORE, EVIDENT T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INVESTED A SUM. OF RS.L0,02,500/- FROM HIS UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN OBTAINING THESE BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. I HAVE THEREFORE, REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME OF RS. 10,02,500/- AS AB OVE, HAS ESCAPED INVESTMENT WITHIN MEANING 148 OF L.T. ACT, 1961. HENCE IT IS A FIT CASE FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE I.T. AC T, 1961. ' THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THE REOPENING WAS D ONE, WITHOUT EXAMINING THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE APPELLANT, IS THEREFORE NOT CORRECT. 4.4 COPY OF THE REASONS WAS DULY PROVIDED TO THE APP ELLANT. PERUSAL OF THE REASONS SHOWS THAT AO HAD APPLIED HIS MIND T O THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE O/O THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (IN V.), NEW DELHI. HE 5 HAD COMPARED THE FORMATION RECEIVED WITH THE INFORMA TION AVAILABLE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AND THEREAFTER HAD REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME OF RS.10,25,500/- HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMST ANCES THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE NOTICE WAS SERVE D WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND IS NOT CORRECT. THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE R EOPENED ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM DIT(INV.), NEW DELHI. FOR ACQUIRING JURISDICTION U/S 147 OF THE ACT THE A.O. IS REQUIRED TO HAVE IN HIS POSSESSION CERTAIN MATERIAL OR INFORMATION ON THE BAS IS OF WHICH HE COULD PRIMA-FACIE HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME ESCAP ED ASSESSMENT. COMMUNICATION RECEIVED BY AN ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DISCHARGE OF HIS OFFICIAL DUTIES IS VALID INFORMATION FOR ISSUE OF N OTICE U/S 148. RELIANCE IN THIS REGARD IS PLACED ON THE CASE OF MONEY GROWTH IN VESTMENT & CONSULTANTS (P) LTD. V. ITO (2012) 71 DTR 3L7 (DELHI)(H IGH COURT) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT MATERIAL AND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY INVESTIGATION WING TO THE AO, ON THE BASIS OF WHICH HE RECORDED REASONS A ND REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT, THROW CONSIDERABLE DOUBT ON THE VERACITY , CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS AND TRUTH OF PARTICULARS FURNISHED BY T HE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AND THEREFORE NOTICE ISS UED BY AO UNDER SECTION 148 WAS VALID. RELIANCE IN THIS REGARD I S ALSO PLACED ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS:- I) SRINIVASA KHANDASARI UDYOG VS. ITO (ITAT, BANG) 56 ITD 146 II) ITO VS. PURUSHOTAM DAS BANGUR & ANR. (SC) 224 ITR 362 III) ELPHINSTONE PICTURE PALACE VS. UNION OF INDIA & ANR (PAT) 74 ITR 115 IV) H.A. NANJI & CO.VS. ITO (CAL) 120 ITR 593 V) SOHAN SINGH VS. CIT (DEL) 158 ITR 174 VI) RATTAN GUPTA VS. CIT (P&H) 234 ITR 220 THE HON'BLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RATTAN GUPTA VS. CIT (SUPRA) OBSERVED AS UNDER :- 'AT THIS STAGE, THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER WHAT IS STATED IN THE LETTER DATED 17.02.1993, OR THE CONCLUSION DRAWN FROM THE APP RAISAL REPORT ARE TRUE OR NOT. THE ONLY QUESTION ON THIS STAGE IS ABOUT THE R ELEVANCY OF THE MATERIAL FOR FORMATION OF REQUISITE BELIEF IT CANNOT BE HELD THA T THE LETTER AND THE APPRAISAL REPORT DO NOT CONSTITUTE THE RELEVANT MATERIAL. IT IS A DIFFERENT MATTER THAT DURING INQUIRY THE PETITIONER MAY BE ABLE TO ESTABLI SH THAT THE CONCLUSIONS 6 ARE NOT CORRECT. IN OUR VIEW, THERE IS NO ILLEGALITY IN THE ISSUE OF IMPUGNED NOTICE. ' SIMILARLY, INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM OTHER AGENC IES LIKE CIB ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE OR FROM OTHER ASSESSING OFF ICERS CONSTITUTE MATERIAL FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT AND NOTICE ISSU ED U/S 148 IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS ALSO VALID. RELIANCE ,IN THIS REGAR D IS PLACED ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS:- I) CGT VS. SUSHEELA SHANMUGASUNDARAM (MAD) 24 2 ITR 176 II) ITO VS. GURINDER KUAR (ITAT, DEL) 102 ITD 1 89 III) STERLITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD. VS. ACIT ( MAD) 302 ITR 275 4.5 AFTER INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS, THE A.O. COUL D CONCLUDE ON THE BASIS OF OTHER INFORMATION AND EXPLANATION OF THE APPELLAN T THAT NO INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, YET FOR ACQUIRING THE JURI SDICTION, THE A.O. COULD STILL HAVE VALID BASIS ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION A VAILABLE AT THE TIME OF INITIATING ACTION U/S 147/148 OF THE ACT TO HAVE PRI MA-FACIE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT SUCH INCOME ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THE INFORMATIO N RECEIVED BY THE A.O., AS MENTIONED ABOVE, COULD VERY WELL MAKE HIM PRIMA-FACIE HAVE SUCH REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME ESCAPED ASSESSMENT . FURTHER, AS THE AO HAS INITIATED THE PROCEEDINGS ON THE BASIS OF AB OVE MENTIONED SPECIFIC INFORMATION IT COULD NOT BE SAID THAT THE ACTION OF THE A.O. WAS ON THE BASIS OF CERTAIN SURMISES OR CONJECTURES ONLY. IT COULD ALS O NOT BE SAID THAT THE MATERIAL IN POSSESSION OF THE A.O, COULD JUST MAKE HIM H AVE REASON TO SUSPECT AND NOT REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. MOREOVER ADEQUACY OF SATISFACTION OF AO IS NOT JUST ICE-ABLE AS WAS HELD BY HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GURERA GAS CYLINDERS PVT. LTD. VS. CIT (258 ITR 170) AND IN CASE OF SWARAJ ENGINE LTD, VS. ACIT (260 ITR 202) FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF HO N'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CASH OF PHOOL CHAND BAJRANG LAI VS. ITO (203 ITR 45 6). THE RATIO OF THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE LD. COUNSEL WOULD, THEREFOR E, NOT HELP THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. > 4.6 AS REGARDS THE APPELLANT'S CONTENTION THAT THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED WITH THE APPROVAL OF CIT INSTEAD OF JCIT, AND IS THER EFORE BAD IN LAW, I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE SAME. APPROVAL OF JCIT IS INCLUDE D WHILE TAKING THE APPROVAL OF CIT. IT IS NOT THE APPELLANT'S CASE THA T APPROVAL OF JCIT HAD NOT BEEN TAKEN. ANY PROPOSAL FOR APPROVAL OF CIT G OES THROUGH JCIT AND JCIT'S APPROVAL IS THEREFORE OBTAINED BEFORE THE PROPOSAL GOES THROUGH TO CIT. NO PREJUDICE HAS BEEN CAUSED TO THE APPELLANT BY ISSUANCE OF NOTICE WITH THE APPROVAL OF COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX. MOREOVER, IT WAS NOT A DEFECT WHICH COULD NOT BE CURED UNDER SECTION 7 292B OF THE ACT, AND THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HA D BEEN VALIDLY INITIATED. THE SECTION 292B WAS INSERTED WHEREBY NO RETURN OF INCOME, ASSESSMENT, NOTICE, SUMMONS OR OTHER PROCEEDING SHALL BE RENDERED INVALID MERELY ON ACCOUNT OF ANY MISTAKE, DEFECT OR OMISSION WHERE THE RETURN, ASSESSMENT, NOTICE, SUMMONS OR OTHER PROCEE DING IN SUBSTANCE AND EFFECT ARE IN CONFORMITY WITH OR ACCORDING TO THE INTENTION AND PURPOSE OF THE ACT. BY INCORPORATING THIS PROVISION, IT HAS BEEN MADE CLEAR THAT PURELY TECHNICAL OBJECTIONS CARRYING NO SUBSTA NCE SHALL NOT COME IN THE WAY OF VALIDITY OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ETC. IN OTHER WORDS, MINOR DEFECTS OR IRREGULARITIES IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AFORE SAID, WOULD NOT NEGATE THE VALIDITY OF THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AND THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RAISE TECHNICAL OR VENIA L DEFECTS IN THIS REGARD. AR OF THE APPELLANT HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY P REJUDICE HAVING BEEN CAUSED TO THE APPELLANT. IN THE PRESENT FACTS AND CI RCUMSTANCES, NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER SHALL NOT RENDER THE PROCEEDINGS INVALID AS THE SAME ARE IN S UBSTANCE AND EFFECT ACCORDING TO THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE AC T FALLING UNDER SECTION 292B OF THE ACT AND THE PROCEEDINGS CANNOT BE HELD TO BE VITIATED. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE JUDGMENTS IN SWARAN KANTA V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (1989) 176 ITR 291 (PB. & HR.) AND DEORIA OXYGEN COMPANY V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I, (2007) 210 CTR REPORTS 509. RELIANCE IN THIS REGARD IS ALSO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT DATED 6.12.2010 IN INCOME TAX REFERENCE NOS. 15 OF 2000, I N THE CASE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , AMRITSAR, VERSUS RAJBIR SING H KARTA OF CH. KESHO DASS (HUF), PATHANKOT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND THE CASE LAWS DISCUSS ED ABOVE, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 6. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE ALS O PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTE DLY, IN THIS CASE THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 20.5.2002 WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQ UENTLY, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF DIRECTO R OF INVESTIGATION-I, NEW DELHI TO THE EFFECT THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS RECEIVED BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES FOR A TOTAL SU M OF RS.10,02,500/- FROM S/SHRI VIPIN KUMAR AND ASHOK KU MAR 8 VINDAL FROM BANK ACCOUNT NO.8378 AND 11282 RESPECTI VELY IN JAI LAXMI COOPERATIVE BANK, FATEHPURI, NEW DELHI AS UNDER : SR.NO. NAME OF THE PERSONS HAVING BANK ACCOUNT IN YOUR BRANCH BANK A/C NO. DATE AMOUNT IN FAVOUR OF 1. SHRI VIPIN KUMAR 8378 05.03.02 5,01,250/- SHRI IS HWAR DASS GARG, LUDHIANA 2. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR 11282 05.03.02 5,01,250/- SHRI ISHWAR DASS GARG, LUDHIANA 7. IN VIEW OF THE NATURE OF THE ABOVE ENTRIES AND THE AMOUNT INVOLVED, IT APPEARED TO BE AN ENTRY OF ACCO MMODATION NATURE. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FORMED AN OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEES INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.10,02,500/- HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IN TERMS OF P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT, AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AFTER RECORDING REA SONS MENTIONED IN PARA 4.3 OF THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT ( APPEALS) REPRODUCED HEREINABOVE. 8. IN MY OPINION, THE ISSUE AT HAND IS SQUARELY CO VERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE B Y THE DECISION OF THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 15.6.2 015 IN THE CASE OF MS.SUSHILA SINGLA VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, LUDH IANA IN ITA NO.780/CHD/2012 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 . THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE OF MS.SUSHILA SINGLA (SUPRA). IN THE CASE OF MS.SUS HILA SINGLA, THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF T HE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM ACIT, C C-V, 9 LUDHIANA TO THE EFFECT THAT HIS ASSESSEE ONE SHRI J AGDISH DUGGAL, RESIDENT OF SARABHA NAGAR, LUDHIANA HAD DIS CLOSED TO HAVE MADE A GIFT OF RS.5 LACS DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 IN FAVOUR OF MS.SUSHILA SINGLA. IN VIEW O F THE NATURE OF THIS ENTRY AND QUANTUM OF GIFT INVOLVED, IT APPEARED TO BE AN ENTRY OF ACCOMMODATION NATURE. IN THAT V IEW OF THE MATTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FORMED AN OPINION THA T THE ASSESSEES INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.5 LACS REPRES ENTING THE VALUE OF SO-CALLED GIFT HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IN T ERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT, AND NOTICE UN DER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT, WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AFTER RE CORDING FOLLOWING REASONS : IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED GIFT OF RS. 5,00,000/- FROM SHRI JAGDISH DUGGAL, 38-G, SARABHA NAGAR, LUDHIANA FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT NO. 16503 OF SHRI JAGDISH DUGGAL MAINTAINED WITH THE CANARA BANK, BHARAT NAGAR CHOWK, LUDHIANA. THIS INFORMATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-V, LUDHIANA VIDE HIS LETTER NO. ACIT/CC.V/LDH/24 DATED 7.4.2004 ADDRESSED TO THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE VII, LUDHIANA FOR CONSIDERING APPROPRIATE ACTION IN THE HANDS OF THE DONEES. THAT THE NATURE OF THIS ENTRY APPEARS TO BE AN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. I HAVE THEREFORE, REASONS TO BELIEVE THAT THE ABOVE SAID AMOUNT OF GIFT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE REQUIRES THROUGH INVESTIGATION BY REOPENING THE CAS E U/S 148 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. IN VIEW OF THE GIFT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE NOTICE U/S 148 IS ISSUED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 9. IN THE CASE OF MS.SUSHILA SINGLA (SUPRA), THE 10 LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) OBSERVED THAT THE INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONSTITUTED REASON TO BEL IEVE, PRIMA FACIE THAT THE INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHE R OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS INITIATED THE PROCEE DINGS ON THE BASIS OF SPECIFIC INFORMATION AND, THEREFORE, IT CA NNOT BE SAID THAT THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS ON THE BASIS OF SURMISES OR CONJECTURES ONLY. WHEN THE MATTER CAM E UP IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBU NAL UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS), OBSERVING A S UNDER : 9. IN THE PRESENT CASE ORIGINALLY RETURN FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE ON 6.9.2003 WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT AND A NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUED ON 20.3.2008. THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED TH E VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT AS PER THE SUBMISSIONS NOTE D HEREIN ABOVE. AS REGARDS THE SCOPE OF THE EXPRESSION REASON IN THE PHRASE REASON TO BELIEVE AND ALSO THE SCOPE AND EFFECT OF SECTION 1 47 AS SUBSTITUTED W.E.F. APRIL 1, 1989, AS ALSO SECTIONS 148 TO 150 HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ACIT V RAJESH JHAVERI (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) AT PAGE 511 & 512 AND OBSERVED AS UNDE R:- 16. SECTION 147 AUTHORISES AND PERMITS THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER TO ASSESS OR REASSESS INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX IF HE HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME FOR ANY ASSESSMEN T YEAR HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THE WORD 'REASON' IN THE PH RASE 'REASON TO BELIEVE' WOULD MEAN CAUSE OR JUSTIFICATI ON. IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CAUSE OR JUSTIFICATION TO KNO W OR SUPPOSE THAT INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, IT CAN BE SAID TO HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT AN INCOME HAD ESCAPE D ASSESSMENT. THE EXPRESSION CANNOT BE READ TO MEAN T HAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD HAVE FINALLY ASCERTAINED T HE FACT BY LEGAL EVIDENCE OR CONCLUSION. THE FUNCTION OF THE A SSESSING OFFICER IS TO ADMINISTER THE STATUTE WITH SOLICITUD E FOR THE PUBLIC EXCHEQUER WITH AN INBUILT IDEA OF FAIRNESS T O TAXPAYERS. AS OBSERVED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN CENT RAL PROVINCES MANGANESE ORE CO. LTD. V. ITO [1991] 191 ITR 662 , FOR INITIATION OF ACTION UNDER SECTION 147(A) (AS THE PROVISION STOOD AT THE RELEVANT TIME) FULFILMENT OF THE TWO REQUISITE CONDITIONS IN THAT REGARD IS ESSENTIAL. A T THAT STAGE, THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE PROCEEDING IS NOT R ELEVANT. IN 11 OTHER WORDS, AT THE INITIATION STAGE, WHAT IS REQUI RED IS 'REASON TO BELIEVE', BUT NOT THE ESTABLISHED FACT O F ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. AT THE STAGE OF ISSUE OF NOTI CE, THE ONLY QUESTION IS WHETHER THERE WAS RELEVANT MATERIA L ON WHICH A REASONABLE PERSON COULD HAVE FORMED A REQUI SITE BELIEF. WHETHER THE MATERIALS WOULD CONCLUSIVELY PR OVE THE ESCAPEMENT IS NOT THE CONCERN AT THAT STAGE. THIS I S SO BECAUSE THE FORMATION OF BELIEF BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER IS WITHIN THE REALM OF SUBJECTIVE SATISFACTION (SEE IT O V. SELECTED DALURBAND COAL CO. P. LTD. [1996] 217 ITR 597 (SC) ; RAYMOND WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. V. ITO [1999] 236 ITR 34 (SC). 17. THE SCOPE AND EFFECT OF SECTION 147 AS SUBSTITU TED WITH EFFECT FROM APRIL 1, 1989, AS ALSO SECTIONS 148 TO 152 ARE SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE PROVISIONS AS THEY STOOD PRIOR TO SUCH SUBSTITUTION. UNDER THE OLD PROVISION S OF SECTION 147, SEPARATE CLAUSES (A) AND (B) LAID DOWN THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMEN T FOR THE PAST ASSESSMENT YEARS COULD BE ASSESSED OR REAS SESSED. TO CONFER JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 147(A) TWO CON DITIONS WERE REQUIRED TO BE SATISFIED : FIRSTLY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER MUST HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME, PROFITS OR GAINS CHARGEABLE TO INCOME TAX HAVE ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, A ND SECONDLY HE MUST ALSO HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT S UCH ESCAPEMENT HAS OCCURRED BY REASON OF EITHER OMISSIO N OR FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE FUL LY OR TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR HIS ASSESSMENT OF THAT YEAR. BOTH THESE CONDITIONS WERE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO BE SATISFIED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER COULD HAVE JURISDICTION TO ISSUE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 READ WITH SECTION 147(A). BUT UNDER THE SUBSTITUTED SECTION 1 47 EXISTENCE OF ONLY THE FIRST CONDITION SUFFICES. IN OTHER WORDS IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR WHATEVER REASON HAS RE ASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IT CONFE RS JURISDICTION TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT. IT IS, HOWEV ER, TO BE NOTED THAT BOTH THE CONDITIONS MUST BE FULFILLED IF THE CASE FALLS WITHIN THE AMBIT OF THE PROVISO TO SECTION 14 7. THE CASE AT HAND IS COVERED BY THE MAIN PROVISION AND NOT TH E PROVISO. 18. SO LONG AS THE INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 147 ARE F ULFILLED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS FREE TO INITIATE PROCEEDIN G UNDER SECTION 147 AND FAILURE TO TAKE STEPS UNDER SECTION 143(3) WILL NOT RENDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER POWERLESS TO INITIATE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS EVEN WHEN INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1) HAD BEEN ISSUED. 10. IN THE INSTANT CASE ALSO THE RETURN WAS PROCESS ED U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE S UPREME COURT, IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR WHATEVER REASON HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, IT CONFERS JURISDICTION TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT. IN THE CASE OF ACIT V RAJESH JHAVERI THE HON'BLE SU PREME COURT HAS 12 OBSERVED THAT WORD REASON IN THE PHRASE REASON T O BELIEVE WOULD MEAN CAUSE OR JUSTIFICATION TO KNOW OR SUPPOSE THAT INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, IT CAN BE SAID TO HAVE REASON TO BELIEV E THAT INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT FURTH ER OBSERVED THAT EXPRESSION CANNOT BE READ TO MEAN THAT THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER SHOULD HAVE FINALLY ASCERTAINED THE FACT BY LEGAL EVIDENCE OR CONCLUSION. WHAT IS REQUIRED IS REASON TO BELIEVE BUT NOT THE ESTA BLISHED FACT OF ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. AT THE STAGE OF ISSUE OF NOT ICE, THE ONLY QUESTION IS WHETHER THERE WAS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON WHICH A R EASONABLE PERSON COULD HAVE FORMED THE REQUISITE BELIEF. THE HON'BL E SUPREME COURT FURTHER OBSERVED THAT WHETHER MATERIAL WOULD CONCLU SIVELY PROVE ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME IS NOT THE CONCERN AT THIS STA GE. THIS IS SO BECAUSE THE FORMATION OF THE BELIEF IS WITHIN THE REALM OF THE SUBJECTIVE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. FROM THE A BOVE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IT IS CLEAR THAT AT THE TIME OF RECORDING REASONS FOR INITIATING PROCESSING U/S 147 OF THE ACT, IT I S NOT NECESSARY THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD HAVE FINALLY ASCERTAIN TH E FACTS BY LEGAL EVIDENCE OR CONCLUSION. AT THE INITIAL STAGE WHAT IS REQUIRED IS REASON TO BELIEVE BUT NOT ESTABLISHED FACT OF ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. AT THE TIME OF ISSUANCE OF NOTICE U/S 148, THE ONLY QUESTION IS WHETHER THERE WAS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON WHICH A REASONABLE PERSON COUL D HAVE FORMED THE REQUISITE BELIEF. THE QUESTION WHETHER THE MATERIA LS WOULD CONCLUSIVELY PROVE THE ESCAPEMENT IS NOT THE CONCERN AT THIS STA GE. IN THE INSTANT CASE, ASSESSING OFFICER RECEIVED AN INFORMATION FRO M ACIT, CC-V, LUDHIANA THAT ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED GIFT OF RS. 5 LAKHS FROM SHRI JAGDISH DUGGAL, 38G, SARABHA NAGAR, LUDHIANA FROM BANK ACCOUNT NO. 16503 OF SHRI JAGDISH DUGGAL MAINTAINED WITH CANARA BANK, BHARAT NAGAR CHOWK, LUDHIANA. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS AL SO THIS INFORMATION THAT THE NATURE OF THIS ENTRY WAS AN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. IN MY OPINION, THE ABOVE INFORMATION / MATERIAL RECEIVED BY THE AS SESSING OFFICER WAS RELEVANT AND AFFORDED A LIVE LINK OR NEXUS TO THE F ORMATION OF THE PRIMA FACIE BELIEF THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAD ESCA PED ASSESSMENT IN THE ASSESSEES HANDS. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT REOPENING OF THE ASS ESSMENT WAS INVALID. WHILE TAKING SUCH A VIEW I AM FORTIFIED BY THE DECI SION OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAJAT EXPORT IMPORT IND IA PVT. LTD V ITO (2012) 341 ITR 135 (DELHI) WHEREIN THE HON'BLE DELH I HIGH COURT OBSERVED AS UNDER:- 13 AT THE STAGE WHEN REASONS ARE RECORDED FOR REOPENI NG THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT REQUIRED T O BUILD A FOOL PROOF CASE FOR MAKING ADDITION TO THE ASSESSEE S INCOME ; ALL THAT HE IS REQUIRED TO DO AT THAT STAGE IS TO F ORM A PRIMA FACIE OPINION OR BELIEF THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASS ESSMENT. THE RELEVANCY OF THE MATERIAL BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS TO BE JUDGED ONLY FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE AND NOT FRO M THE PERSPECTIVE AS TO WHETHER THE MATERIAL IS SUFFICIEN T OR ADEQUATE TO SUSTAIN THE ADDITION ULTIMATELY. THAT W ILL BE AN ASPECT WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL EXAMINE AND DECIDE IN THE COURSE OF THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AFTER HE ARING THE ASSESSEE IN THE MANNER REQUIRED BY LAW. 11. IN THE ABOVE CASE, INVESTIGATION WING PROVIDED THE INFORMATION ALONG WITH CHEQUE NUMBER AND BANK DETAILS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN CHEQUE FROM ENTRY PROVIDER AND THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT HELD THAT THERE IS REASON TO BELIEVE PRIMA-FACIE THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. TH E HON'BLE HIGH COURT FURTHER HELD THAT MATERIAL BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFF ICER WAS RELEVANT AND AFFORDED A LIVE LINK OR NEXUS TO THE FORMATION OF T HE PRIMA FACIE BELIEF THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMEN T IN THE ASSESSEES HANDS 12. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, I DO NOT SEE ANY INFIRMIT Y IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND HOLD THAT REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT W AS VALID AND ACCORDINGLY I UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND DISMIS S GROUND NOS. 1 & 2 OF THE APPEAL. 10. THE DECISION RENDERED BY THIS BENCH OF THE TRI BUNAL IN THE CASE OF MS.SUSHILA SINGLA (SUPRA) IS SQUAREL Y APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. IN THIS CASE, IN VESTIGATION WING PROVIDED THE INFORMATION THAT DURING THE FINAN CIAL YEAR 2001-02 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03, THE AS SESSEE HAD RECEIVED BOGUS ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES FOR A TOTA L SUM OF 14 RS.10,02,500/- FROM S/SHRI VIPIN KUMAR AND ASHOK KU MAR FROM BANK ACCOUNT NOS.8378 AND 11282 RESPECTIVELY I N JAI LAXMI COOPERATIVE BANK, FATEHPURI, NEW DELHI. TH E DETAILS WERE ALSO SUBMITTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN MY OPINION, ON THE BASIS OF ABOVE INFORMATION, THE ASSESSING OF FICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN FORMING A PRIMA FACIE OPINION OR BELIE F THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE . THE MATERIAL BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RELEVANT AND AFFORDED A LIVE LINK OR NEXUS TO THE FORMATION OF T HE BELIEF. THE INFORMATION, SO RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER, WAS CREDIBLE AND NOT A MERE GOSSIP. CONSIDERING THE E NTIRE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE AND ALSO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL (SMC BENCH) PASSED IN THE CASE OF MS.S USHILA SINGLA REFERRED TO ABOVE, I DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN GROUND NOS.1 AND 2 OF THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, I HAVE NO H ESITATION IN REJECTING THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 11. VIDE GROUND NO.3 OF THE APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE H AS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.10,02,500/- ALLEGEDLY BORROWED FROM S/SHRI VIPIN KUMAR AND ASHOK KUMAR VINDAL. T HE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.10,02,500/- FOR THE REASONS STATED IN PARAGRAPHS 7.3 TO 7.8 OF HIS ORDER. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) CONF IRMED THE ADDITION ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE CREDITW ORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT BY MERE LY CLAIMING THAT THE CREDITS WERE UNSECURED LOANS AND BY SUBMIT TING THE 15 CONFIRMATIONS OF SO-CALLED CREDITORS, THE GENUINENE SS OF THE TRANSACTIONS HAS NOT BEEN PROVED. 12. I HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BO TH THE PARTIES AT LENGTH. IT IS WELL SETTLED LAW THAT IN ORDER TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS, THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO PRO VE THE FOLLOWING INGREDIENTS : I) THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR, II) THE CAPACITY OF THE CREDITOR TO ADVANCE MONEY; AND III) THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. 13. S/SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL AND ASHOK GOYAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THE EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AN D GENUINENESS OF THE CASH CREDITS. HE FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE MADE THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE MERELY ON THE BASIS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED BANK STATEMENT, WHICH STAND OF THE REVENUE IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS FILED COMPLETE ADDRESSES, PAN NUMBERS OF THE PARTIE S AND BOTH THE PARTIES ARE ASSESSED TO TAX. IN MY CONSI DERED VIEW, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE RELEVANT EVIDENC E IN ORDER TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. COPIES OF CONF IRMATIONS OF THE PARTIES ARE AVAILABLE AT PAGES 7 AND 16 OF THE PAPER BOOK. HOWEVER, NO DATE IS MENTIONED ON SO-CALLED CONFIRMA TIONS. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEM ENT OF WEALTH-TAX RETURN AND COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF I NCOME-TAX 16 RETURN OF SHRI ASHOK KUMAR VINDAL. THESE DOCUMEN TS ARE AVAILABLE AT PAGES 10 TO 14 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK. THESE DOCUMENTS RELATE TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. SIMILARLY, IN THE CASE OF SHRI VIPIN KUMAR, THE AS SESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF WEALTH-TAX R ETURN AND COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INCOME-TAX RETURN, W HICH ARE AVAILABLE AT PAGES 18 TO 21 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE SE DOCUMENTS ALSO RELATE TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. I AM FULLY IN AGREEMENT WITH THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE LEA RNED CIT (APPEALS) THAT ALL THE DOCUMENTS/EVIDENCES SUBMITTE D BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAIN TO FINANCIAL YEAR 2000-01 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02, WHEREAS, THE TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES ARE DATED 5.3.2002 I.E. FINAN CIAL YEAR 2001-02 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. THER E IS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF S/SHRI VIPIN KUMAR AND ASHOK KUMAR VINDAL FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. 2002-03. THERE IS NO EVIDEN CE ON RECORD TO DEMONSTRATE THAT S/SHRI VIPIN KUMAR AND ASHOK KUMAR VINDAL HAD REQUISITE AMOUNT WITH THEM IN O RDER TO ADVANCE THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING O FFICER HAS SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE EVIDENCE RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE CREDITWORTH INESS OF THE CREDITORS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CATEGORI CALLY OBSERVED THAT NEITHER ANY BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENTS O F S/SHRI VIPIN KUMAR AND ASHOK KUMAR VINDAL, NOR ANY PROOF REGARDING IDENTITY OF THESE PERSONS WAS FURNISHED. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FAILED TO PRODUCE HIS BANK ACCOUNT ST ATEMENT 17 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. I AM ALSO IN AGREEMEN T WITH THIS OBSERVATION OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) THAT ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED CERTAIN DOCUMENTS (NOT R ELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03), HE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO E STABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTH INESS OF THE CREDITORS. THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) HAS CORR ECTLY OBSERVED THAT BY MERELY CLAIMING THAT THE CREDITS W ERE UNSECURED LOANS AND BY SUBMITTING CONFIRMATIONS FRO M SO- CALLED CREDITORS, THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIO NS CANNOT BE PROVED. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS MISERABLY FAILED TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE ALLEGED CREDITORS AS WELL AS THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. THER E IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO PROVE THE ABOVE INGREDIENTS O F CASH CREDITS. THUS, CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND CI RCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, I UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LE ARNED CIT (APPEALS) AND DISMISS THE GROUND NO.3 OF THE APPEAL . 14. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 6 TH DAY OF JULY, 2015. SD/- (H.L.KARWA) VICE PRESIDENT DATED : 6 TH JULY, 2015 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH