9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l. Adv. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal filed by the Revenue emanates from the order of Ld. CIT (Appeals)-XXVII, New Delhi dated 29.08.2008 for the Assessment Year 2005-06. The grounds of appeal taken by the revenue are as under :- 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions of ₹ 57,10,566/- made by the AO u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in admitting the additional evidence during the appellate proceedings without following the procedure and principle as per Rule 46A of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Return of income was filed on 30.8.2005 at an income of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same and decide it according to law, after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee for substantiating its claim before the AO. However, on the merit of the case he relied upon the order of the AO and the addition made by the AO may be upheld. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel of the Assessee stated that as regards the arguments advanced by the Ld. DR on the admission of additional evidence by the Ld. CIT(A) is concerned, he stated that the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Manish Buildwell reported in 204 Taxmann vs. 106 (Del.) is not applicable in the present case. Because during the course of assessment proceedings, Ld. CIT(A) has asked the assessee to furnish the additional evidence and in c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the additional documents, which is permissible under the law, hence, there is no violation of Rule 46A at all. In view of the above, we dismiss the Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue. 8. As regards the ground no. 1 relating to deletion of addition of ₹ 57,10,566/- is concerned, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has deliberately adjudicated the issue in dispute vide para nos. 6 to 6.9 at page no. 10 12 vide his impugned order dated 29.8.2008. For the sake of convenience, we are reproducing the para no. 6 to 6.9 of the impugned as under:- 6. Determination: The submissions made by the appell+ant have been carefully considered in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of law. It is observed that the Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n furnished by her during the course of the assessment proceedings and without taking into account the debit entries in the statement of account of the banks. 6.4. It has been submitted that the assessee is maintaining personal books of accounts for her day-to-day entries. Copies of the aforesaid bank accounts maintained in the books of accounts of the assessee along with copies of bank statements of both the banks giving particulars of each and every transaction made therein and copy of cashbook have been furnished which have been placed on record. The books of accounts maintained by the assessee have also been produced for perusal during the course of the appellate proceedings. 6.5. As regards the cheque entries in the Savings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso been furnished. 6.7. As regards the cash transactions, it has been submitted that the assessee is maintaining regular cashbook. Copy of cashbook giving the cash flow statement for the year under consideration has been furnished which has been placed on record. This includes all the cash deposits and withdrawals made in both the bank accounts as well. 6.8. On careful examination of the details furnished by the appellant as above, it is, thus, observed that the appellant has furnished satisfactory explanation in regard to the nature and source of each and every deposit made in cash by cheque in her aforesaid bank accounts. 6.9. In view of the above discussion, it is hereby held that the Assessing Officer was not justifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
