9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 460X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the addition of Rs. 71,000. These additions were upheld by the learned CIT(A). The matter travelled upto Tribunal and in the first round Hon'ble Tribunal set aside the entire assessment order appeal vide order dt. 1st July, 2005 for asst. yrs. 1992-93 and 1993-94. The Tribunal observed while restoring the issues that as per learned Authorised Representative the assessee was engaged in agricultural activities since long and was also carrying on nominal business as proprietor of M/s Balaji Timber Udhyog, near bus stand, Ladnun. The Hon'ble Tribunal felt it just to restore the entire matter back for de novo consideration after providing proper opportunity to the assessee. In the second round, the learned AO gave proper opportunity to the assessee, who submitted his case with the help of evidences. Various additions were repeated and these are the subject-matter of this appeal. 4. The first ground is general in nature. The second ground relates to sustained addition of Rs. 71,000. The facts apropos this ground are that the assessee had admitted having invested Rs. 71,000 in two plots purchased in his and his wife's names. The assessee apart from contesting the very admission and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Hon'ble Tribunal has given a finding that no proper opportunity was given to the assessee and as such the matter was restored for fresh consideration, the Department has to consider the entire evidences tendered by the assessee in their correct perspective without doubting their veracity. It is correct that from the perusal of the statement of the assessee it is not clearly established as to who recorded these statements. The assessee has written a letter to the AO in this regard. From the copy of assessment order for asst. yr. 1993-94 placed at PB 41, it is noticed that the AO himself has reduced the amount of admission, meaning thereby, the statement was not accepted as sacrosanct by the Department itself. Now coming to other evidences, it is the case of the assessee that the plot was purchased out of loan amounts received from two persons, namely, Shri Babu Lal and Shri Shanti Prakash. These loans are stated to have been given earlier and the recovery was utilised in making investment in the purchase of land. Both these persons were examined by learned AO. Both have confirmed the plea taken by the assessee. The assessee has also filed his duly sworn-in-affidavit to that eff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved that this amount has to be added in this assessee's hand. It "could be" considered in his case but it would admit plausible explanations if any given. These additions travelled upto the Tribunal, in assessee's case and the Tribunal has set aside the same for fresh consideration. In his written submission at p. 13, the learned Authorised Representative has submitted in point (iv) as under: "(iv) That without any prejudice to the aforesaid submissions, it is further submitted that Shri Jeth Mal Jangid himself submitted a written explanation with regard to the aforesaid amount of Rs. 55,364 before the then learned AO during the course of his own assessment proceedings for the asst. yr. 1992-93 which is being reproduced hereinunder: 2. That regarding the amount of Rs. 55,364 as referred to in your notice, my humble submissions are as follows: (i) That even at this old age of 83 years. I tried my best to find out the books of accounts and related records for the financial year 1992-93, but I failed. My books of accounts and related records were being handled by many persons, namely, my son, Ghanshyam, my grandson Babulal, my advocate, Mr. Manmohan Jalan, my accountant, Shricha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s assessee. What the Tribunal has observed is that this statement can bind only the maker and not a third party. The above explanation of the assessee is self-speaking and leads me to delete this addition from the hands of Shri Ghanshyam. The Department was to look for other evidences. When the investment was claimed as recorded in assessee's father's books of accounts as per the explanation of Shri Jeth Mal Jangid, how could it be added on the basis of the admission of Shri Ghanshyam. This addition is also deleted being baseless. 10. The next ground of this appeal relates to charging of interest under ss. 234A and 234B of the Act. Since the charging of interest is mandatory but it admits consequential relief I allow consequential relief to the assessee. 11. In the result, the appeal for asst. yr. 1992-93 is partly allowed. ITA No. 807/Jd/2007; Asst. yr. 1993-94 12. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) dt. 9th Oct., 2007. 13. The first ground is general in nature and needs no adjudication. The second and third ground relate to addition of Rs. 1,00,000 (Rs. 1 lakh) on account of unexplained investment in the construction of a build ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
