Smt. Kirti Chhabra ITA No. 437/Ind/2016 IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 437/Ind/2016 Assessment Year: 20011-12 Smt. Kirti Chhabra Dewas PAN ALRPC 7001R :: Appellant Vs Addl. CIT Range 1, Ujjain :: Respondent Appellant by Shri S.S. Deshpande Respondent by Shri K.G. Goyal 8.9.2016 Date of hearing 5.10.2016 Date of pronouncement O R D E R PER SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM This is appeal preferred by assessee against order of learned CIT(A), Ujjain, dated 1.3.2016. 1 Smt. Kirti Chhabra ITA No. 437/Ind/2016 2. only ground pressed before Tribunal is that learned CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining addition of Rs. 9 lacs on account of cash credit. 3. short facts of case are that assessee is earning income from tuition, capital gain and interest. Assessing Officer has made addition of cash credit of Rs.9 lacs. assessee has taken unsecured loan from M/s Sai Traders on 29.5.2010, 23.3.2011 and 25.3.2011 amounting to Rs.2 lacs, Rs. 5 lacs and Rs. 2 lacs, respectively, by account payee cheque. assessee has filed loan confirmation letter containing complete details of transaction, copy of income tax return and bank account. learned Assessing Officer verified cash book and lender was out of station and he did not appear before Assessing Officer and filed copy of account of lender with State Bank of India. lender has withdrawn 2 Smt. Kirti Chhabra ITA No. 437/Ind/2016 amount from CC loan account with Bank of Baroda and deposited same into State Bank of India. lender is doing business of Anaj Mandi. learned Assessing Officer was of view that lender has no capacity to give loan, therefore, he disallowed same which learned CIT(A) has confirmed. relevant findings of learned CIT(A) are as under :- Ground nos. 1, 2 & 3 :- Through these grounds of appeal appellant has challenged addition of Rs.9,00,000/- on account of unproved loan. appellant has taken loan of Rs.9,00,000/- from Shri Sai Traders. Shri Sai Traders before advancing loan to appellant made cash deposit before issuing cheque. details are as under :- 3 Smt. Kirti Chhabra ITA No. 437/Ind/2016 Date Deposit/withdrawal by Amount (in Rs.) 21.05.2010 By cash deposit Rs.2,00,000 29.05.2010 To assessee Rs.2,00,000 23.03.2011 By cash deposit Rs.15,00,000 23.03.2011 To assessee Rs.5,00,000 25.03.2011 By cash deposit Rs.7,00,000 25.03.2011 To assessee Rs.2,00,000 proprietor of M/s Shri Sai Traders submitted that above cash deposit has been made after making withdrawal from CC account with Bank of Baroda, Dewas Branch. cash withdrawal has been made in month of March 2011 whereas cash deposit is also pertaining to May, 2010. entries of withdrawal cannot be co-related with cash deposit made in bank account. During 4 Smt. Kirti Chhabra ITA No. 437/Ind/2016 course of remand proceedings A.O. recorded statement of Shri Rajesh Rathore (Prop. M/s Shri Sai Traders) on 03.11.2015. In statement Shri Rajesh Rathore failed to explain purpose of withdrawing of such huge cash and keeping it at house without any reason. Therefore, appellant failed to establish credit worthiness and genuineness of transaction. Therefore, addition made by A.O. amounting to Rs.9,00,000/- is confirmed. appeal on these grounds is dismissed. Against above findings of learned CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 4. Before us, learned counsel for assessee submitted that all necessary evidences have been produced before ld. CIT(A) by way of bank statements. All entries are appearing in cash book 5 Smt. Kirti Chhabra ITA No. 437/Ind/2016 of lender. There is no dispute regarding loan taken from bank. It was further submitted that cash withdrawn from bank was hardly kept for ten to fifteen days which was explained by creditor that it was withdrawn for business purposes for purchase of grains in Mandi. He thus submitted that source of source is also proved and since transactions have been routed through bank, genuineness cannot be doubted. 5. On other hand, Ld. DR relied on orders of authorities below. 6. We have heard both sides. We find that in statement recorded by A.O. lender has admitted fact about advancing loan to assessee and has also filed necessary bank statements to prove source of advance. In view of this, we are of view that credits stand fully 6 Smt. Kirti Chhabra ITA No. 437/Ind/2016 explained and there is no warranty to sustain addition. We thus set aside order of learned CIT(A) and allow this ground of assessee. 7. At time of hearing, ground no. 2 was not pressed by learned counsel for assessee. same is, therefore, dismissed. 8. In result, appeal of assessee stands partly allowed. Pronounced in open Court on 5.10.2016 Sd/- sd/- (O.P.Meena) (D.T.Garasia) Accountant Member Judicial Member /Dated : 5.10.2016. Dn/ 7 Kirti Chhabra v. Addl. CIT Range 1, Ujjain