9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f income filed has to be treated as a scrap of paper filed by anonymous person reflecting fictitious income, assets and liabilities. He has further noted that the copy of statement of Shri Vinod Modi, ITP which was relied by the A.O for making the additions was never furnished to the Assessee nor the Assessee was afforded opportunity to cross-examine Shri Vinod Modi. Before us, Revenue has not brought any material on record to controvert the findings of ld. CIT(A). We therefore find no reason to interfere with the order of ld. CIT(A). - Decided against revenue. - I.T. A. Nos. 448 to 450 /AHD/2011 with C.O. Nos. 75 to 77/AHD/2011 - - - Dated:- 30-1-2015 - SHRI MUKUL Kr. SHRAWAT AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, JJ. For the Appellant : Smt. S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me tax (A) has erred in law and on facts in treating the return of income as non-est and the assessment framed on its basis u/s. 144 as ab-initio void. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (A) has erred in law and on facts in annulling the assessment order. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. It is, therefore , prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (A) may be set-aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored . 3. On the other hand the grounds raised by the Assessee in the C.O reads as under:- 1. In the alternative and without prejudice to invalidity of return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3/- were disallowed and the gross agricultural income of ₹ 2,12,218/- was considered to be from unexplained sources and it was treated as cash credit u/s. 68. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who after considering the submissions of the Assessee deleted the addition made by A.O by holding as under:- 2. The facts of the case, quite peculiar in nature, are as follow. Return of income came to be filed on 31- 03-2006 admitting income of ₹ 47,520/- and agricultural income of ₹ 1,56,105/-. The Balance sheet annexed to the ROI is reproduced below :- .. As detailed in the assessment order, the opportunities given to the appellant were not availed of in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, observed as under:- 3.1.2. Coming to the additions made, it is seen from para-3 and 4.7 of the assessment order that immovable property -'Bharuch Shala' costing ₹ 17 lakhs was shown but no documentary evidence was enclosed. As seen from paras 4.6 and 4.7 of the assessment order, appellant is stated to be a teacher with Atmiya Higher Secondary School and the same school is supposed to be owned by appellant. As against this asset, unsecured loans of ₹ 11.35 lakhs from family members (father who passed away in 2002; mother aged 65 years; wife; and son studying in 7th Std.) and capital of ₹ 6,53,975/- were shown. A.O. never made any attempt to counter the appellant's explanation that he does not have any su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant owned the immovable property valued at over Rs.l 7 lakhs.A.O. did not establish that the bank account mentioned in the ROI ever existed or that it was in appellant's name. The overwhelming evidence filed by the appellant (supported by documentary evidence and affidavit) is uncontroverted. There is nothing on record to show that copy of the statement recorded from Shri Vinod J. Modi, ITP on 20-12-2007 (relied on by the A. O. in the assessment order) was furnished to the appellant or to show that appellant was afforded opportunity to cross-examine Shri Vinod J. Modi. 4. Therefore, I hold that the ROI is non-est and the assessment framed on its basis u/s. 144 is ab-initio void and nullity. The assessment order is ann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him. It was therefore submitted that the Assessee did not have the income which is stated in the return of income and the return of income has not been filed by Assessee. He thus supported the order of CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that CIT(A) after considering the submissions made by the Assessee has noted and given a finding that Assessee had never applied for PAN, the return of income was not verified and the return being not filed by the Assessee stand established and the return of income filed has to be treated as a scrap of paper filed by anonymous person reflecting fictitious income, assets and liabilities. He has further noted that the copy of statement of Shri Vinod Mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
