Ita/24/2004 Of Sanil K.m.p v. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Cochin

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2008 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1930 ITA.No. 24 of 2004() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11/08/2003 IN IT (S& S) A.17/COCH/1997 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT -------------------------- SANIL K.M.P., KUNNATH PARAMBU, VALAYANCHIRANGARA, PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADV. SRI.C.KOCHUNNY NAIR SRI.DALE P.KURIEN RESPONDENTS: REVENUE -------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -------------------------------------------- I.T.A. No. 24 OF 2004 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT C.R. Ramachandran Nair,J. Heard counsel for the appellant and standing counsel for therespondent. The only question raised for decision is whether theTribunal was justified in sustaining addition of cash credits underSection 68 of the I.T. Act. The loan creditors shown in the accountsare admittedly close relatives of the assessee. The case of the assesseebefore the Tribunal as well as before this Court in this appeal is thatsome of the loan creditors have confirmed transaction by appearingbefore the assessing officer, and so much so, loan credit stands provedand therefore addition is not justified under Section 68 of the Act. Wenotice from the Tribunal's order that Tribunal rejected the claimbecause except giving confirmation letters, none of the loan creditorsproved their source before the assessing officer. In fact no effort isseen made to establish that the loans are advanced by close relatives tothe assessee. We are in complete agreement with the finding of theTribunal because close relatives are prone to help the assessee in theincome tax proceedings and unless they prove their source, credits claimed by them cannot be accepted. We are not told the reason whythe source of funds could not be explained by the assessee's relativesin whose name credits were shown in the account. Want of source offund affects the genuineness of the transaction and unless source isproved, the loan creditors cannot be said to have discharged the duty ofproving that the loans shown in the accounts were genuinely advancedby them to the assessee. The Tribunal also noticed that no proof wasproduced regarding repayment of loan credits. Section 269(ss) of theAct provides for payment and repayment of loans in excess of Rs.20000/- through account payee cheques. There is no proof producedbefore the Tribunal to show that loans taken were through accountpayee cheques or were repaid through such instruments in accordancewith statutory provisions. In the circumstances, we find no ground tointerfere with the order of the Tribunal. There is no scope forentertaining additional evidence at this distance of time in this Court inappeal proceedings under Section 260A of the Act. We therefore dismiss the appeal. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge. (V. K. MOHANAN) Judge.