9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 433X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him was something verifiable even at the CIT (Appeals)’s stage in view of the bank statements furnished – keeping in view the Tribunal’s findings on the issue of the quantum of addition that was deleted, as such there is no substantial question of law arises for consideration – Decided against Revenue. - ITA 166/2013 - - - Dated:- 7-3-2014 - S. Ravindra Bhat And R. V. Easwar,JJ. For the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel submits that in these circumstances, when the assessee sought to place reliance on an affidavit attested by a foreign notary on 27.02.2009, the Tribunal/lower authorities ought to have exercised caution and not blindly accepted the explanation. 3. Learned counsel for the Revenue relied upon the remand reports dated 18.01.2011 and 20.11.2011 made during the proceedings before the Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In this respect he invited our attention to paper book pages 5-30 where all documents explaining the entries were placed. 10. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the material available on record. We have observed that assessee had received Rs. 26,05,000/- and Rs. 15,50,000/- into his bank account No.0619000101211534 with Punjab National Bank on 5.4.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... side). Therefore, the amount of Rs. 26,55,000/- is fully explained. Similarly 15,50,000/- received by assessee on 15.7.2006 was transferred to the account of Mrs. Kalpana Dalal by Jeet Rani (sister in law of assessee) who had received amount of Rs. 15,03,657/- from LIC as maturity proceeds of Policy No.113290044. The fact has been proved from the Bank A/c of Jeet Rani (paper book page 12 back ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
