9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are relevant for proper adjudication in this case. We find that it is not clear from the records as to whether the assessee has submitted these documents or as to whether these documents were requisitioned and examined by the appellate authorities. We further find that in the appellate order the ld. CIT(A) has simply affirmed AO’s remand report without giving a proper finding of his own. In these circumstances in our considered opinion interest of justice will be served if the issues raised in this appeal are remitted to the file of AO. Accordingly the issues raised in these appeals are remitted back to the file of AO. The AOs are directed to consider the case afresh after giving the assesses proper opportunity of being heard. - Matter rema ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfirmation filled during hearing proceeding before L d D.C.I.T. and L d C.I.T.(A) which is unjustified, arbitrary, unlawful and therefore liable to be deleted. 3. That the appellant pray before your Honour to consider the fact, evidence and explanation, and for sale of justice opportunity to get cross verification of source of investment and pray to delete the addition of ₹ 33,99,777/- by L d D.C.I.T. 4. That the appellant craves to add or amend any grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing. ITA No.620/Kol/2012- Uttam Kumar Gutgutia : 2.1. The grounds of appeal raised by assessee in this appeal read as under :- 1.That the Ld. CIT(A) was erred in relying on concluding Remark of Remand Report, of L d D.C.I.T. that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TA No.619/Kol/2012- Rishi Tulsiyan 2.2. The grounds of appeal raised by assessee in this appeal read as under :- 1.That the Ld. CIT(A) was erred in relying on concluding Remark of Remand Report, of L d D.C.I.T. that consideration money of ₹ 33,93,396/- for land (alleged addition) to the builder but payment to the extent of ₹ 20,00,000/- made by the appellant on d 06/11/2006 after the date of registration of alleged land i.e. on 17/04/2006 is explained and balance of ₹ 13,48,940/- stand unexplained, without considering the fact, evidence explanation which evidenced that the payment for alleged land cost have been already made by the appellant before Registration deed of land dtd. 17/04/2006 as also evidenced in clause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the assessee s books. He proceeded to make the impugned additions. 4. Before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted fresh documents from which transpired that the assessee has purchased immovable property from M/s.Vijay Shanthi Builders Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) also obtained Remand Report from the AO. On the basis of the remand report of the AO the ld. CIT(A) observed that after going through the documents submitted by the assessee the AO has found the impugned deficiencies and hence in the case of Brijesh Kumar Gutgutia the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee s appeal. However, in the case of Rishi Tulsiyan and Umesh Kumar Gutgutia ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee s appeal. Now against the orders of ld. CIT(A) assesses are in appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
