M.M. Kumar, J. - (1.) THE Revenue has come in appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 against the order dt. 24th April, 2006 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 1167/Chd/2004. The Tribunal has rejected the appeal of the Revenue and upheld the order of the CIT dt. 31st Aug., 2004 and had set aside the order of assessment dt. 26th March, 2001 made by the AO by making addition of income to the tune of Rs. 48,000. The aforementioned amount was computed as income as the AO has refused to accept the unsecured loan contributed by various persons. The view of the Tribunal emerges from the perusal of para 15 of its order which reads as under: The only ground remains for adjudication is ground No. 1 wherein the addition on account of unsecured loans of Rs. 64,640 from Shri Rattan Singh and Rs. 80,000 from his family members which was deleted by the learned CIT(A) has been challenged on the plea that assessee has failed to prove the identity of these persons. The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of manufacture of furniture in village Burail, showed income of Rs. 51,675 which comprises of business income of Shri Mohd. Aslam Khan (minor) at Rs. 26,400 including rental income. The learned AO made the assessment at an income of Rs. 1,96,335 on account of alleged unexplained payment made to the Estate Officer, UT Chandigarh, towards instalment of SCO No. 42. The assessee made payments of Rs. 64,660 on 15th Feb., 1997 and Rs. 80,000 on 18th July, 1996 to the Estate Officer on account of instalment of SCO No. 42, Sector 26, Chandigarh. The learned AO has disputed the source of these instalments. The major plea of the assessee is that Rs. 64,660 was raised as a loan from Shri Rattan Singh son of Shri Lachhman Dass r/o H. No. 1342, Burail, who advanced loan through bank draft for Rs. 64,750 drawn on his saving bank account No. 530 maintained with Chandigarh State Co -operative Bank, Chandigarh. The assessee filed the affidavit and copy of bank pass book and the creditor confirmed the advancement of loan out of his dairy farming and sales of buffaloes and cows. There is also mention that cow was sold to Shri Sarfi Mohammed for a sum of Rs. 35,000 and buffaloes to Shri Hans Raj and filed the copies of receipts of these amounts. The loan raised was returned in January, 1999. Shri Rattan Singh could not be produced as he was not available at that time and AO showed his inability to give more time being time -barring assessment. This fact was not disputed by the Revenue that this person was produced before the learned first appellate authority. As far as confirmation of gift from a relative, Mrs. Hurmat w/o assessee and his deceased son, Shri Anwar and daughter -in -law, Mrs. Mumtaz, confirmations were fully filed along with their creditworthiness. All these persons are Income Tax assessees and copies of their returns were also filed before the authorities. If all these facts are analysed, identity of these persons is not doubted by the Revenue. Undisputedly, assessee provided all the details of the creditors and their creditworthiness was not challenged. None of these persons has denied the respective amounts which have been paid through account payee cheque/pay order/bank draft. The learned CIT(A) in view of these facts has very rightly deliberated upon the issue and deleted the impugned additions. The same is upheld. This ground of the Revenue is also having no merit.
(2.) A perusal of the aforementioned finding recorded by the Tribunal shows that question of fact has been determined by the Tribunal by accepting the identity of Rattan Singh who had advanced loan of Rs. 64,660 to the assessee and other persons. We have heard learned Counsel at some length and are of the view that no question of law warranting admission of the appeal would arise. Once the Tribunal has accepted the identity of the persons who have given loans to the assessee and the transactions are either through bank drafts or cheques then the creditworthiness of those persons has apparently been presumed. Moreover, the relatives of the assessee like Mrs. Hurmat wife of the assessee and his deceased son, Shri Anwar and daughter -in -law, Mrs. Mumtaz, who have given gifts have fully filed confirmations along with their creditworthiness. These persons are even otherwise Income Tax assessees and copies of their returns have also been filed before the authority. The Tribunal has taken specific notice of the fact that no question with regard to the creditworthiness of those persons who had advanced loans to the assessee, was raised before the appellate authority or elsewhere. These are necessarily all questions of fact as this Court cannot determine the creditworthiness of persons who have advanced loans or given gifts to the assessee nor the question of their identity could be gone into. We believe that no question of law warranting admission of this appeal would arise. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal of the Revenue by recording the finding that no substantive question of law has been raised.;