JAWAHAR LAL GUPTA, J. - (1.) THE assessee has filed this appeal with the grievance that the Tribunal has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 61,000 to the income declared by the assessee in the return for the asst. year 1988 - 89.
(2.) MR . Sehgal, the learned counsel for the appellant contends that the order passed by the AO had been rightly reversed by the CIT(A). However, the Tribunal has wrongly accepted the appeal of the Revenue. In the circumstances, the learned counsel maintains that the following question of law arises for consideration of this Court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, has erred in making addition of Rs. 61,000 under S. 68 of the IT Act, 1961, despite of complete evidence regarding identity of creditor, source of credits and actual transaction has been proved ?" Counsels for the parties have been heard.
(3.) THE assessee had claimed that Ram Partap had advanced an amount of Rs. 54,000 to eight different persons. That amount had been returned by the borrowers to the assessee. It was credited to the account of Ram Partap by the assessee. Thus, the addition to the extent of Rs. 54,000 is invalid. He had directly received an amount of Rs. 7,000.;