9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 981X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see failed in discharging the primary onus cast upon it?" [B] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in settling aside the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for addition of Rs.4 crores being amount advanced to Shri Sanjay Amin though the assessee failed in discharging the primary onus cast upon it?" 2. Question [A] pertains to claim of loss of shares of Rs.1.33 crores made by the assessee, which was however disallowed by the Assessing Officer. After detailed discussion, CIT(Appeals), allowed the claim of the assessee. Thereupon, the Revenue approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order remanded the issue before the Assessing Officer making following observations:- "4. We have heard the rival c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntity of the party is not established. Accordingly, taking into consideration the facts in entirety, we feel that his common issue need re-examination at the level of Assessing Officer afresh. The assessee is also directed to produce the details in respect of M/s. R.K. Consultancy and the transaction of shares of Alps Industries. Accordingly, this common issue of these appeals of the Revenue is set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer and allowed for statistical purposes." 3. Question [B] pertains to the receipt of Rs.4 crores, which the assessee claimed he had received by way of an advance from one Shri Sanjay Amin. The Assessing Officer doubted the claim of the assessee. The assessee produced relevant material at his command. He, h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 14-02-1996 ( it seems that the block period mentioned by the CIT(A) is not correct block period) and the assessee before us has not filed the copy of block assessment order. The assessee has filed the details from its books of account regarding the creditor Shri Sanjay C. Amin and not the independent informations. In view of these facts, we are of the view that the assessee is unable to prove the cash credit and the information was filed before the CIT(A) for the first time and without verifying the same, the CIT(A) accepted the genuineness of the transaction. In view of these facts, we set aside this common issue in both the appeal. We direct the Assessing Officer to decide the common issue in terms of the provisions of Sec.68 of the I.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
