9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 979X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned, however the order was even otherwise bad in law as the jurisdictional issue raised in the appeal before the CIT(A) had not been addressed. 2. The relevant facts of the case are that the assessee was found to have deposited cash amounting to Rs. 30 lacs in his bank account maintained with the REWARI CENTRAL COOP BANK Ltd, Bawal. The Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain the same. Considering the explanation dated 24.02.2012, the Assessing Officer after recording the reasons that income has escaped assessment required the assessee to file its return in response to notice under section 148, the assessee filed a NIL return of income. After issuance of notices under section 143 (2)/142(1) etc., the assessee was required to exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of the assessee in his bank. iv) The company was also asked to furnish verification regarding making payment in cash to Sh.Ram Bax but no reply was furnish by the company." 2.1. As a result of these reasons, addition of the said amount was made in the hands of the assessee. 3. In appeal before the CIT(A), the assessee assailed the transfer of jurisdiction from one AO to another AO. On merit, it was submitted that the agricultural land belonging to Shri Ram Bax i.e. the father of the assessee and his brothers had been sold for an amount of Rs. 3,01,62,500/- to M/s Triveni Infrastructure Development Company Limited, New Delhi. The assessee's father in lieu of his share received sale consideration of Rs. 50,27,084/-. Out of this, Rs. 1, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formation regarding the liquidation of the company etc. were all information made available to the AO and he failed to duly consider the same. The intention of the AO was questioned also on the ground that he had even failed to address the affidavits on record as he was intent on rejecting the explanation of the assessee supported by a sale deed. Reliance was placed on various decisions of different Courts in support of the assertions made. The primary onus placed upon the assessee it was stated had been discharged and in case the AO still sought the presence of anyone from the purchaser company than it was for the AO to enforce attendance of the witness. It was further canvassed that the assessee is not obliged to exercise his rights in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n record, the payment it has been explained was received from his father in cash on 24.09.2006 and deposited in his bank on 25.09.2006. ON 27.09.2006 it was withdrawn to the extent of Rs. 29,99,000/- in cash and handed over again to his father who utilized the same for construction of house in the name of his father. It was his submission that in the circumstances whether it was returned to the father or was allowed to be retained by the assessee on his father's instruction or utilized by the family in any other manner, was not an issue before the tax authorities as they were only required to consider whether the deposit of Rs. 30 lacs was as per assessee's explanation from the sale of the specific piece of land sold by the assessee's fathe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
