2015 (8) TMI 565

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 77; 50 lakhs the ITAT found no perversity in the order of the CIT (A) to held that once the Assess had offered an explanation, the AO ought to have conducted an inquiry and undertaken verification of the properties - Held that:- Appellant was unable to point out why the direction of the ITAT remanding the matter of addition of ₹ 37,80,000 to the AO for affording an opportunity to the Assessee to explain the details should be interfered with. She urged that even in respect of the addition of ₹ 50 lakhs a similar direction ought to have been issued. The Court is unable to agree. The second addition of ₹ 50 lakhs stood on a different footing. As is evident from the concurrent orders of the CIT (A) and the ITAT, the said ad .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sessee's appeal was partly allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ CIT (A) ] by an order dated 22nd February 2013. The CIT (A) noted the explanation offered by the Assessee that had made total payment of ₹ 40,12,501/- till 31.03.208, to acquire the right to own unit No. 504. in Pearl Business Park at Netaji Subhash Place. As regards the loose sheets recovered during the search, the Assessee explained to the AO in a letter dated 16th September 2010 that they were the photocopies of the diary of one of the property brokers whom the Assessee had come into contact with while looking for a unit. The said broker had given a lot of proposals to the Assessee which were noted in his diary with the surname of the Assessee and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ures to infer that the Assessee had paid ₹ 50 lakhs and added the said sum to his income. Again, the CIT (A) held that once the Assess had offered an explanation, the AO ought to have conducted an inquiry and undertaken verification of the properties. In the absence of any evidence the addition was held to be unsustainable and ordered to be deleted. 5. In its impugned order in the appeal by the Revenue, the ITAT held that as far as the addition of ₹ 37,80,000 was concerned, since the Assessee had admitted to having paid for the property at ₹ 13,000 per sq.ft but not out of the books, it was just and proper to restore the issue to the file of AO with a direction that the AO shall afford an opportunity of hearing for the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X