INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. BABULAL RAMPRASAD AGARWAL HUF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the Revenue arising from the order of learned CIT(A) and the grounds raised are hereby decided as follows:

(2.) FACTS in brief as emerged from the corresponding assessment order passed u/s. 143(3), dated 08.12.2009 were that the assessee HUF is a proprietor of M/s. Shivco Prints and engaged in the business of manufacturing of cloth. It was noted by the AO that the assessee had shown unsecured loans of Rs.15 lacs from the following parties:

(3.) WHEN the matter was carried before the First Appellate Authority, a remand report was called for. In remand proceedings, a question of cross -examination had arose and the assessee had informed the learned CIT(A) that he was present in the office of the AO on the appointed day for cross -examination of Sri Ramdinesh Ranjit Sharma but the AO had failed to produce him. After examining the facts of the case, learned CIT(A) has deleted the addition by assigning the following reasons: