Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5.1 It was submitted by the appellant that, the AO has not examined the EMI payment, loan outstanding of new JCP etc in books and filing revised computation of balance sheet as per books. It is stated that loan of ` 16 lakhs was obtained from Indus Bank as per EMI statement directly obtained from the loan creditor. The margin money was accounted for in books filed before the AO and it was generated only from bank drawals and cash on hand. It was submitted that there was no suppression of ` 19 lakhs and it is supported by loan evidence. Hence, it was prayed that addition is not warranted and be deleted. 5.2 I have considered the submissions. In the written arguments, it is seen that new JCP machine was purchased for ` 19 lakhs from margin of ` 3 lakhs derived from own accruals paid from the bank and out of loan of ` 16 lakhs from Leyland group. The copy of the ledger account showing JCP machine purchase EMI account and depreciation was wrongly debited in diesel operation expenses. The AO disallowed ` 19 lakhs on account of non production of proper evidence for source of investment by the appellant. It was admitted that usually financier is having purchase invoice of JCP machine and further without giving an opportunity to the appellant rejected the new machinery purchased. A copy of statement of account as on 26.04.2007 from Indusind Bank Limited, No.89, G.N.Chetty Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017 is filed and placed on record. It could be seen from the statement of account that the amount financed was ` 16 lakhs and margin money was ` 3 lakhs and that the contract date is mentioned as 30.07.2005. With production of this evidence, I am of the view that the appellant has discharged his duty for the source towards acquisition of JCP machine. Hence, I direct the AO to delete the addition of ` 19 lakhs."