Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal ... vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1),, ... on 3 December, 2018
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
" SMC " BENCH, AHMEDABAD
BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And
MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1147/Ahd/2016
( नधा रण वष /Assess ment Year : 2010-11)
Mohmmed Ibrahim Mohmmed बनाम/ The Income Tax
Iqbal Shaikh Vs. Officer
1712, Changej Pole Ward-14(1)
Dariapur Ahmedabad
Ahmedabad-380 001
थायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . / PAN/GIR No. : ASDPS 1082 P
(अपीलाथ /Appellant) .. ( यथ / Respondent)
अपीलाथ ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri B.R. Popat, AR
यथ क ओर से/Respondent by: Shri G.C. Daxini, Sr.DR
ु वाई क तार ख/
सन Date of Heari ng 31/10/2018
घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronounce ment 03 /12/2018
आदे श / O R D E R
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad [CIT(A) in short] vide appeal no.CIT(A)-5/ITO Wd.14(1)/57/2014-15 dated 02.03.2016 arising in the assessment order passed under s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 26.03.2013 relevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10.
ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11 -2-
2. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition made by the AO for ₹ 29,07,842.00 as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act.
3. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee is an individual and declared his income under the head salary. The assessee during the year has deposited cash of ₹ 32,64,815.00 in his saving bank account having account No. 032201000014349 maintained with Bank of Baroda.
4. On question by the AO about the source of cash deposited in the bank account, the assessee vide letter dated 15th October 2012 submitted that his father is working in a petrol pump located at Lal Darwaza, Ahmedabad, operated by M/s Lakhia Brothers a proprietary concern of Shree Sheetal Lakhia. The father of the assessee was holding certain credit cards of banks. The father of the assessee to extend the financial help to his son (assessee) has swapped his credit card against the sales of petrol to the customers in cash and retained the cash with himself which was forwarded to the assessee. Accordingly, the assessee used to deposit the cash in the bank account to make the payment of the credit card held by his father on the due date. The assessee against the use of the credit of his father got a small discount from the bank amounting to ₹ 11,964.00 only under the year consideration which he agreed to offer the same to tax.
5. The assessee also claimed that there was cash withdrawal from his bank account amounting to ₹1,99,800 & 195,000 aggregating ₹ 3,94,800 ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11 -3- which was utilised for making the cash deposit in the bank. Therefore, to this extent there cannot be any addition on account of deposit of cash in the saving bank account. The assessee in support of his claim relied on the judgement of Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Ananthram Veersinghaiah & Co. versus CIT reported in 123 ITR 457.
6. The assessee also claimed that he has received a sum of ₹ 2,55,000 through banking channel from his father on 3rd July 2009. The assessee was frequently transferring the fund to M/s Lakhia brothers and receiving back cash from M/s Lakhia brothers in small denomination. The assessee explained the flow of transaction as detailed under:
[ "3.1. On facts of the case, it is further placed on record that there was an aggregate balance of approximately Rs.2,55,000/- in saving bank account of Shri Iqbal Shaikh, the father of the undersigned. This balance was lying in his saving bank account maintained with Bank of Baroda.
Out of this amount a sum of Rs.2,55,000/- was transferred on 3rd July 2009 and same was deposited in account no 03320100014349 standing in the name of the undersigned with Bank of Baroda. It was initially from the balance created through this deposit that certain amounts were transferred in the books of M/s.Lakhia Brothers so as to enable this unit to discharge its contractual obligations for purchase of fuel and for incurring other expenses, as mentioned elsewhere in this submission.
3.2. While the undersigned transferred certain funds in the banking account of M/s.Lakhia Brothers as and when the same was required and as mentioned elsewhere in this submission, corresponding withdrawals were also made from this unit for ensuring that the temporary fund initially prked with them is received back, till the same is required again by this unit. Several successive transactions were accordingly carried ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11 -4- out in the following fashion, which are very much cross verifiable from internal as well as external sources:
(a) Transfer of fund from the banking account of the undersigned to the banking account of M/s.Lakhia Brothers.
(b) On account receipt of funds by the undersigned either by effecting cash withdrawal from the banking account of M.s,Lakhia Brothers or otherwise.
(c) Deposit of the fund so withdrawn into the banking account of the undersigned, as and when required.
(d) Reintroduction of the fund into the business of M/s.Lakhia Brothers is issuing cheques."
7. In view of above, the assessee claimed to have made the payment to M/s Lakhia Brothers amounting to ₹ 17,25,000 on regular intervals which was received back in cash. Accordingly, the assessee has received money in cash from M/s Lakhia brothers through his father which was deposited in the bank account of the assessee.
8. The assessee further claimed that the entire transaction of Rs. 17,25,000 was sourced out of the initial fund received from his father amounting to Rs. 2,55,000 only.
9. The assessee before AO in support of his contentions filed certain documents as detailed under:
i. Copy of the cash book,
ii. Ledger copy of Shree Iqbal bhai Shaikh (father of assessee)
iii. Ledger copy of M/s Lakhia Brothers-Iqbal bhai iv. Copy of ledger of lakhia brothers ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11 -5- v. Credit card statements of father vi. A copy of ICICI bank statement maintained by Shree Iqbal bhai sheikh
10. However, the AO during the assessment proceedings observed that the assessee has not furnished the contra copy of the account of the assessee maintained by the M/s Lakhia Brothers. The AO also noticed that there was no documentary evidence filed by the assessee in support of his contention.
11. In view of above the AO issued a show cause notice under section 142 (1) of the Act dated 5-11-2012 for furnishing complete addresses, copy of the account from the books of M/s Lakhia Brothers, PAN and copy of acknowledgement of the return of income.
12. The assessee in response to the above notice filed his reply dated 19-11-2012 along with the following documents:
1. The pan of the M/s.Lakhia Brothers i.e. AACPL-7679-Q
2. Acknowledgement of the income tax return of M/s.Lakhia Brothers
3. Address of M/s. Lakhia Brothers
13. However, the assessee expressed his inability to furnish his copy of account in the books of M/s.Lakhia Brothers on the reasoning that he cannot access to the accounts maintained by M/s.Lakhia Brothers being third party. The assessee accordingly requested the AO to exercise his ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11 -6- power granted on the section 131 and 133(6) of the Act for collecting the requisite information from M/s Lakhia Brothers.
14. However the AO did not believe the transactions carried out by the assessee with M/s.Lakhia Brothers as discussed above in the absence of copy of the account of the assessee in books of accounts of M/s.Lakhia Brothers.
15. Accordingly, the AO issued summons under section 131 of the Act to M/s.Lakhia Brothers and Shree Iqbal bhai Sheikh.
16. In response to the notice under section 131 of the Act, Shree Iqbal bhai Sheikh accepted to have carried out the financial transactions with the assessee in the manner as discussed above. However, Shree Iqbal bhai sheikh failed to furnish the supporting evidences and admitted that he does not maintain any books of accounts.
17. However, there was no response from M/s.Lakhia Brothers in response to the notice issued under section 131 of the Act.
18. In view of above, the transactions carried out by the assessee with M/s.Lakhia Brothers amounting to Rs.29,07,842.00 was treated as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the same and added to the total income of the assessee.
19. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the ld. CIT-A. The assessee before the ld. CIT-A submitted that a sum of ₹ 11,82,482/- was ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11 -7- deposited in cash in the bank account to make the payment of the credit card held by his father. As such the father of the assessee provided the cash to the assessee out of the sales effected at the petrol pump. The father of the assessee has swapped his credit card against the sale of petrol to the customers in cash. The father of the assessee by this process was able to arrange the cash against the sales of his credit cards which was subsequently given to the assessee. On the due date of the outstanding amount of the credit card the assessee used to deposit the cash in his bank account for making the payment of the credit cards held by his father. The assessee in support of his claim filed the copies of the credit card statements evidencing that the card was used for the purchase of the petrol.
20. The assessee also claimed that there was withdrawal of ₹ 3,94,800 from the bank in cash which was utilised in depositing the same in the bank account.
21. Regarding the payment made to M/s Lakhia Brothers through cheques and cash received from it, the assessee submitted that the transactions were carried out through the current account of the proprietor of M/s Lakhia Brothers. The assessee in support of his claim filed the copy of the current account of the proprietor where the impugned transactions were reflecting. The assessee also claimed that the books of accounts of M/s Lakhia Brothers were duly audited and no defect or whatsoever was pointed out.
ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11 -8-
22. However, the learned CIT-A disregarded the contention of the assessee and confirmed the order of AO in part by observing as under:
"Decision:
3.3. I have considered the facts of the case and submission made by the appellant. During the assessment proceedings the AO has noticed that during the „ year under consideration the assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs.32,64,000/- in Savings Bank Account with Bank of Baroda. The AO has called for explanation regarding nature and source of cash deposited with all supporting evidences. The AO has observed that the assessee had not maintained regular books of accounts and prepared copy of balance sheet. The AO has also observed that the assessee has prepared only cash book and ledger account of M/s.Lakhia Brother & Lakhia Brothers Iqbalbhai and bank books and these account has been prepared only for explaining the issue questioned during the assessment proceedings. The AO has further observed that the entire cash deposit explained by the assessee without evidences hence the explanation did not found satisfactory. On the basis of two bank accounts of the assessee, the day to day cash balance is worked out by the AO and the AO has found that the assessee was having negative cash balance almost during the year and the highest negative balance is amounting to Rs.28,87,550/-. The AO has observed that the asesee has failed to furnish supporting evidences in respect of cash deposit amounting to Rs. 17,25,000/- and Rs. 11,82,482/- claimed to have been received from Lakhia Brothers & Lakhia Brothers Iqbalbhai. Therefore the AO has made addition of Rs.29,07,842/- as unexplained investment.
3.4. During the appellate proceedings the appellant has contended that Mohammad Iqbal Shaikh, his father, was the power of attorney holder in respect of the Petrol Pump business being carried out by Shri Shital Lakhia in the name and style of his proprietary concern M/s.Lakhia Brothers. It is further contended that he was holding certain credits cards in his name ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11 -9- and in order to generate temporary liquidity Shri Iqbal Shaikh swiped his credit card so as to treat the corresponding cash sales of petroleum products of M/s.Lakhia Brothers as representing such sale against these credit card and made the underlying cash available to the appellant. Further contended that while this cycle was rotated several times during the course of the year when it came to discharging the liabilities of the credit card companies the cash so made available in the earlier cycles was deposited in the savings bank account of the appellant and cheques were issued there against in favour of the respective credit card companies. The appellant has also contended that the aggregate cash deposit to the extent of Rs.l2,26,314/- is sourced out of the cash so generated in the preceding cycles of treating cash sales as that effected against the credit card. The appellant has further submitted that a further sum aggregating to Rs.l7,25,000/- deposited in the cash in the bank account is sourced by the corresponding withdrawals made from the books of M/s.Lakhia Brothers against the back to back payments made earlier by crossed account payee bank instrument of the same amount issued in favour of this entity. The appellant submitted that these were thus only the accommodative transaction carried out with M/s.Lakhia Brothers so as to ensure that this entity can, in turn, make timely payments to the petroleum companies so as to enable it to ensure the periodical purchases and receipts of the petroleum products so ordered. It is the contention of the appellant that the origin of these transactions lies in the initial bank balance of exceeding Rs.2,55,000/- which was there in the savings bank account of Shri Iqbal Shaikh. The appellant has also contended that as against aggregate cash of Rs.32,64,815/-
deposited in the bank account he had also made aggregate cash withdrawals of Rs.3,94,800/- from his banking accounts earlier and the smear was thus clearly required to be telescoped against each other. The appellant has submitted that in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anantram Veer Singhaiah & Co. 123 ITR 457 wherein the concept of telescoping in appropriate cases has clearly been approved and ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 10 -
upheld. The appellant has contended that no adverse reference is thus required to be drawn in so far as the cash deposits aggregating to Rs.3,94,800/- is concerned as the same has clearly been sourced from preceding cash withdrawals from same banking accounts.
3.5. During the appellate proceedings a report was called for from the AO vide this office letter dtd. 31.07.2014 and in response to that the AO has submitted remand report vide letter dtd. 16.10.2014 which is reproduced as under:-
"2. On verification of the written submissions made by the AR of the appellant in the form of Paper Book it is noticed that the assessee has submitted nothing new in the Paper Books as submitted during the course of assessment proceedings. Whatever document assessee now produce were already produced before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment proceedings. These have already been duly examined at that time and the Assessing Officer has mentioned this fact in Para -4 (ii), 4(v), 4(ix), 4(x) to 44(xii) of his assessment order. Therefore, since no new documents has been produce before me it is submitted that the findings of the Assessing Officer in his order may please be considered in this regard.
3. In view of the above, the Ld. CIT(A) may decide the issue as he deemed fit after considering facts mentioned above. "
3.6. The facts of the case and submissions of the appellant are considered. The AO has examined this issue in detail in the assessment order. From the documents furnished by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings the AO has observed after examining the same that Shri Iqbalbahi had made certain transaction on behalf of Lakhia Brothers and the assessee has prepared and furnished copy of ledger account mentioned above but he could not furnish contra copy of account or evidences in support of his claim that the transaction claimed have actually been carried out. The assessee has ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 11 -
explained the source of cash deposits by explaining the modus operand! but that is not supported by any documentary evidences for establishment of transaction claimed as actually carried out. In respect of cash receipt amounting to Rs, 17,25,482/- and Rs.11,82,482/- the assessee has explained that it has been received from Lakhia Brothers Iqbalbhai and from Lakhia Brothers but no documentary evidences were furnished for establishing the genuineness of the transaction. The assesse has also failed to furnish copy of his accounts from books of M/s. Lakhia Brothers which shows that the assessee have actually not made any cash transactions with Lakhia Brothers and Lakhia Brothes Iqbalbhai. The AO has also issued summons u/s.131 of the Act to M/s.Lakhia Brothers however neither the owner of M/s.Lakhia Brothers attended and furnished details called for nor Shir Iqbalbhia has furnished the details called for. As the explanation furnished by the appellant is not supported with any documentary evidence the AO has rightly made the addition on account of cash deposited in the bank accounts.
3.7. The appellant has contended that telescoping benefit in respect of cash withdrawals of Rs.3,94,800/- was to be given as no adverse view has been taken by the AO with regard to these cash withdrawals. The contentions of the appellant to this extent are found to be acceptable. Accordingly the AO is directed to give telescoping benefit to the assessee in respect of cash withdrawals aggregating to Rs.3,94,800/-. Thus the ground raised by the appellant is partly allowed.
4. Accordingly, the appeal stands partly allowed."
23. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT (A), assessee is in appeal before us. The learned AR before us filed a paper book running from pages 1 to 187 and submitted that credit cards were used mainly against the sale of the petrols from M/s Lakhia Brothers for the purpose ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 12 -
of generating the cash. The assessee in support of his claim drew our attention on the page 22 of the paper book where the details for the usage of credit cards was placed as reproduced under:
Name of Card Name of Bank Credit Card No. Transactions Holder made with Lakhia Brothers (Rs.) Md.Iqbal Citi Bank 5546370629868010 346157 Shaikh Md.Iqbal HDFC Bank 4346781003439973 377232 Shaikh Limited Md.Iqbal ICICI Bank 517718000048007 155169 Shaikh Limited Md.Iqbal ICICI Bank 5546232901249507 377737 Shaikh Limited Total 12256295
24. The ld. AR in support of his contention filed the copies of the ledgers of all the credit cards along with the credit card statements which are placed on pages 23 to 74 of the paper book.
25. Similarly, the ld. AR submitted that there was back-to-back transaction between the assessee and M/s.Lakhia Brothers amounting to ₹ 17,25,000.00 only. The assessee used to issue cheques to M/s.Lakhia Brothers out of his saving account against the cash received from M/s Lakhia Brothers. As such there was no element of profit in the transaction carried out between the assessee and M/s.Lakhia Brothers. The ld. AR in support of his claim filed the copy of the current account ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 13 -
of the proprietor which placed on pages 85 to 90 of the paper book. The ld. AR also drew our attention on the passbook of saving bank account of the assessee maintained with Bank of Baroda which is placed on pages 109 to 122 of the paper book.
26. The ld. AR also filed the ledger of Shree Iqbal bhai Sheikh along with the relevant pages of pass book showing contra entries which is placed on pages 75 to 79 of the paper book.
27. The ld. AR also filed a copy of cash flow statement reflecting the amount given and received back from M/s Lakhia Brothers along with bank statements of M/s. Lakhia brothers showing corresponding entries which is placed on pages 147 to 187of the paper book.
28. In view of above, the ld. AR for the assessee submitted that there cannot be any addition on account of unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act.
29. On the other hand the ld. DR submitted that there was no information provided by the assessee for the use of the cash generated from the use of credit cards. There is no information where the money has been utilised whether it was incurred as an expense or invested in some properties. The ld. DR also submitted that there was no appearance from M/s Lakhia brothers in response to the notice issued under section 131 of the Act. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of authorities below.
ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 14 -
30. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. In the instant case the assessee has deposited certain amount of cash in his saving bank account which was treated as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act. Accordingly, the addition was made by the AO amounting to ₹ 29,07,842.00 only. The view taken by the AO was subsequently confirmed by the learned CIT (A).
30.1. At this juncture, we find important to reproduce the provisions of section 69 of the Act which reads as under:
"S.69 - Unexplained investments.
Where in the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year the assessee has made investments which are not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of the investments or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the [Assessing Officer], satisfactory, the value of the investments may be deemed to be the income of the assessee of such financial year."
31. A bare reading of the above provisions reveals that there has to be investment made by the assessee which has not been recorded in the books of accounts of the assessee. In the instant case none of the authority below has brought on record suggesting that the assessee has made any kind of investments. Even the ld. DR before us has not brought any evidence showing that the assessee has made investment or utilised the same for personal expenses out of the cash deposited in the bank.
ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 15 -
32. There is no ambiguity that the credit cards were used for the purchase of petrol to the extent of Rs. 11,82,842.00 only. In our considered view, the act of purchasing the petrol cannot be treated as investment as mandated under section 69 of the Act. Thus, it is clear that the money which was deposited in the bank account of the assessee was utilised for the purchase of petrol, therefore, it can be concluded that there was no investment made by the assessee out of the cash deposited in the saving bank account to the extent of Rs. 11,82,842.00.
33. Even it is assumed that the cash deposits represents the income of the assessee then also there cannot be any addition under section 69 of the Act to the extent of Rs. 11,82,842.00. It is because the money deposited by the assessee was used for the payment of the credit cards amounting to ₹ 11,82,842.00 which was used for the purpose of purchase of petrol. There was no information evidencing that the assessee has used the credit card for his personal purposes such as travelling inside or outside India, marriage expenses, food expenses and education expenses or for any business expenses etcetera carried out by the assessee. The frequency of the transactions in credit cards suggests that it was used mainly for the purpose of generating temporary cash only which cannot be treated as income of the assessee.
34. The provision of the Act requires to tax the real income of the assessee. The usage of the credit card viz a viz depositing of cash in the ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 16 -
saving bank account does not represent the real income of the assessee in the given facts and circumstances. In this regard, we find support & guidance from the judgment of C.I.T Central-Iii vs M/S Excel Industries Ltd in CIVIL APPEAL NO.125 OF 2013 wherein it was held as under:
"26. This Court then considered the facts of the case and came to the conclusion (in Godhra Electricity) that no real income had accrued to the assessee in respect of the enhanced charges for a variety of reasons. One of the reasons so considered was a letter addressed by the Under Secretary to the Government of Gujarat, to the assessee whereby the assessee was "advised" to maintain status quo in respect of enhanced charges for at least six months. This Court took the view that though the letter had no legal binding effect but "one has to look at things from a practical point of view." (See R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. Commissioner of Income Tax, [1971] 82 ITR 570 (SC)). This Court took the view that the probability or improbability of realisation has to be considered in a realistic manner and it was held that there was no real accrual of income to the assessee in respect of the disputed enhanced charges for supply of electricity. The decision of the High Court was, accordingly, set aside.
27. Applying the three tests laid down by various decisions of this Court, namely, whether the income accrued to the assessee is real or hypothetical; whether there is a corresponding liability of the other party to pass on the benefits of duty free import to the assessee even without any imports having been made; and the probability or improbability of realisation of the benefits by the assessee considered from a realistic and practical point of view (the assessee may not have made imports), it is quite clear that in fact no real income but only hypothetical income had accrued to the assessee and Section 28(iv)of the Act would be inapplicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. Essentially, the Assessing Officer is required to be pragmatic and not pedantic."
35. There is no doubt that the father of the assessee i.e. Shree Iqbal bhai sheikh was working in a petrol pump as evident from the power of attorney filed by the assessee placed on pages 83 to 84 of the paper book. The credit cards were held in the name of the father and their usage was ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016 Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 17 -
mainly for the purchase of the petrol. The payments of these credit cards were made through the saving bank account of the assessee.
36. In view of above, we are reluctant to confirm the order of authorities below to the extent of Rs. 11,82,842.00 on account of the cash generated through usage of credit card.
37. Regarding the transactions carried out by the assessee with the M/s Lakhia Brothers amounting to ₹17,25,000, we note that these are representing back-to-back transaction between the assessee and M/s Lakhia Brothers. This fact is evident from the current account of the proprietor of M/s Lakhia brothers and the saving bank account of the assessee. The copies of the current capital account of the proprietor of M/s Lakhia brothers and the saving bank account of the assessee are placed on pages 85 to 90 and 109 to 122 of the papers book.
38. It is also important to note that there was not any liability in the books of the M/s Lakhia brothers in the name of the assessee. The copies of the income tax returns and audited financial statements of M/s Lakhia brothers are placed on pages 91 to 108 of the paper book.
39. There was cash flow statement filed by the assessee placed on page 147 of the paper book but no defect of whatsoever was pointed out by the authorities below in respect of such statement.
ITA No.1147/Ahd/2016Mohammed Ibrahim Mohammed Iqbal vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2010-11
- 18 -
40. However, we note that the assessee himself has admitted an income of ₹ 11,964.00 generated from the use of the credit card of his father. Therefore, in our considered view such income is liable to tax under the income tax Act.
41. In view of above, we delete the addition made by the authorities below amounting to ₹ 29,07,842 except a sum of ₹ 11,964.00 which is liable to be added to the total income of the assessee. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
42. In the result the ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on 03/12/2018
Sd/- Sd/-
(MS.MADHUMITA ROY) (WASEEM AHMED)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Ahmedabad; Dated 03/12/2018
ट .सी.नायर, व.(न.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent.
3. संबं*धत आयकर आयु,त / Concerned CIT
4. आयकर आयु,त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-5, Ahmedabad
5. /वभागीय (त(न*ध, आयकर अपील य अ*धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. गाड5 फाईल / Guard file.
आदे शानुसार/ BY ORDER, स या/पत (त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील$य अ%धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad