9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 972X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be cancelled with immediate effect as per the order of Ld. Sub-Judge, Ghaziabad. Since the order of the Ld. Sub-Judge, Ghaziabad was delivered after the order of the A.O., the assessee moved an application for admitting the additional evidences under Rule 46A of the I.T.Rules. In the present case, it is noticed that the Ld. CIT(A) received a remand report from the AO vide his letter no. 431 dated 12.01.2011 which is apparent from the Page no. 1 of the impugned order. Thus, it is clear that the vary basis for making the addition i.e. the Sale Deed was declared as Null & Void and there was no evidence available on the record to substantiate that the cash transaction had ever passed hands, therefore, the impugned addition made by the A.O. was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 28.3.2008 declaring an income of ₹ 88,490/-. Later on the case was selected for scrutiny, the A.O. received AIR information that the assessee has purchased immovable property valuing ₹ 46,00,000/- as per reports of Sub-Registrar third GZB, Tehsil Compound, Ghaziabad. He, therefore, asked the assessee to furnish the details and documents of property acquired and source of ₹ 46 lakhs spent towards the acquisition of property. 3. In response, the assessee has explained as under :- As regards the query raised by your goodself in respect of investment in immovable property, he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Uma Khanna wife of jagdish Rai Khanna are still residing at the above said property. - Both Sh. Jagdish Rai Khanna Smt. Uma Khanna are senior citizens and are very old about 80 years of age. - Sh. Jagdish Rai Khanna has two sons, Lovel Khanna and Kushal Khanna who are not in Ghaziabad and living separately in Dubai and Bangalore respectively. On account of some misunderstandings, Sh. Jagdish Rai Khanna entered into an agreement through Deed writer for the sale of Property in favour of his wife Smt. Uma Khanna, while in fact he could not sale or gift the property in favour of Smt. Uma Khanna Since it was ancestral property and a Part of HUF. (Copy of Sale-Deed enclosed). - No transaction of cash or Bank was ever transacted betwe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.O. Ward 36(3), New Delhi, this has become an additional evidence to prove our case, the Application under Rule 46A is being submitted for your favourable consideration, Your Honour. - Keeping in view the above facts circumstances, it is submitted that since Sale-Deed was not effective and was declared as null void, no sale was executed and therefore no undisclosed expenditure or income of ₹ 46.00 lacs was ever executed. - It is prayed that in view of the above facts circumstances, addition of ₹ 46 Lakhs may kindly be deleted. It was, further, submitted as under : - i. The Ld. Upper Civil Judge (C.D.), Court no. 3, Ghaziabad vide order dated 16.10.2010 has stated as under : On the basis of the Mutual Settlemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In so doing, the AO shall be guided by the principles of natural justice and the contours of the judgment as delivered by the Civil Judge, Ghaziabad in the above case. But for the present, since it is a transaction declared as void, there is no taxability in the hands of the appellant. Accordingly, the addition made of ₹ 46,00,000/- in the hands of the appellant u/s 69C is hereby deleted. 7. Now the department is in appeal. The Ld. DR strongly supported the order of the AO and further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) while allowing the relief to the assessee entertained additional evidences in violation of Rule 46A of the I.T.Rules 1962 and strongly supported the order of the A.O. In this rival submissions the Ld. Counsel for the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
