9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 1032X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pon information allegedly received in regard to the undisclosed income, in the hands of the present assessee. This pertains specifically to two items of properties purchased by it in 2001 and 2002 in District Faridabad. The assessee objected to reopening of the assessment. The Assessing Officer overruled the objection and assessed the income of the assessee treating the two amounts as paid in cash for the purchase of the said plots which were concealed in its return. The assessee's appeal was rejected by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Tribunal in the impugned order however set it aside. The Tribunal relied upon the decision in an identical transaction i.e. DCIT v. Indication Instruments Ltd., ITA No.3513(Delhi) of 2010. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... volved in both the appeals is identical to the issue involved in the case of DCIT v. M/s. Indication Instruments Ltd. (supra) wherein ITAT, Delhi Bench 'C decided the issue in favour of the assessee by observing as under:- "5. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. Both the counsels fairly agreed that identical issue was considered by this Tribunal in ITA no. 4802/Delhi/2009 and Anr. in the case of ITO v. M/s. Dua Auto Components P. Ltd. where also the addition was made on the basis of the same documents found in the same search. The Tribunal considered the issue and held as under: "6. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that the assessment order mentions about the search and seizure oper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agination can be treated as conclusive proofs of on money transactions. Moreover, it is an admitted fact that the documents being relied upon showed account as on 31.10.2001, while as per the registered sale deed the plot was sold on 23.5.2002. Under the circumstances, these additions have been made on the basis of documents found during search as the place of a y third party which at best only showed the tentative/projected purchased consideration. It is not the case that the Circle Rate or the value as per the stamp registration authorities of the impugned property is more than what has been disclosed. It is also not the case that unaccounted cash has been found to be paid by the assessee or received by the seller. There is also no statem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove that the claim of on money transactions has not at all proved in this case. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court decisions above, the onus is that of revenue to prove the same and as clearly found by us above the revenue has failed to do so the same. 6.6 Accordingly, in the background of the aforesaid discussion and precedents, we uphold the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 7. In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. 6. Since the facts and documents in the present case are fame as referred in above Tribunal decision, which both the counsels have fairly agreed to, adhering to the doctrine of staire decises, we uphold the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
