9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 126 - AT - Income TaxAddition of cash as found in the premises of the assessee - assessee explained that cash is related to his son in law - Statement and an acceptance letter were submitted by the son in law but later retracted from his statement and submitted that cash seized in apartment owned by assessee FIL related to elder son-in-law - CIT(A) rejected the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the ownership is still yet determined by the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat related to the matter of the CBI. The case is still pending and not yet decided - HELD THAT - We find that the issue is not yet mature for determination of the ownership of the cash in both the assessee. The substantive assessment and protective assessment both are still alive for determination. Both the ld. Ars has filed new documents before the bench which is not yet verified by the ld. AO. So, the entire grounds of appeal of both the assessees are remitted back to the ld. AO for further adjudication considering the final determination of the Hon ble High Court.
Issues Involved:
The judgment involves appeals filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for A.Y. 2001-02, emanated from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Jammu, passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961. Issue 1: Addition of Rs. 26,40,100 The assessee contested the addition made by the learned AO, claiming it was done without fully looking into the facts and records, without application of mind, and without affording an opportunity to be heard. The appellant argued that the addition was based on a handwritten plain paper denial statement sent by fax, which cannot be considered as evidence against the appellant. The appellant also contended that the basic condition precedent to invoking section 69A was not met. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the ld. AO for further adjudication pending the final determination by the Hon'ble High Court. Issue 2: Addition of Rs. 5,50,000 The addition of Rs. 5,50,000 was made by the ld. AO based on the appellant's inability to produce the person who had advanced the money against the sale proceeds of his house property. The appellant argued that the conclusion drawn by the ld. AO was merely imaginative and not based on facts. The Tribunal remitted this issue back to the ld. AO for further adjudication in light of the final determination by the Hon'ble High Court. Summary of Judgment: The appeals were filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for A.Y. 2001-02, arising from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Jammu. The appeals were heard together and adjudicated with a common order for convenience. The case involved additions of Rs. 26,40,100 and Rs. 5,50,000 made by the ld. AO, which the appellants challenged on various grounds related to evidence, application of mind, and legalities. The Tribunal noted that the ownership of the cash seized was not yet determined as the matter was pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat. The ld. CIT(A) had observed that the case should be kept in abeyance until the ownership of the money was decided by the High Court. The Tribunal emphasized that the issue was not mature for determination and remitted all grounds of appeal back to the ld. AO for further adjudication pending the final determination by the Hon'ble High Court. Both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, and the order was pronounced in open court on 26.05.2023.
|
