9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 880X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount of ₹ 7 to 8 lakh found to be in cash, ₹ 2.5 lakh belonged to her sister. He has not stated that the amount in cash is found from the bedroom of the sister, entire amount belonged to her sister. The sister in her affidavit dated 4.1.2006 has stated that the amount of ₹ 6,38,800/found in cash from the room where she was sleeping with her husband was received by her from in laws, out of the aforesaid amount, some amount is of Stridhan received from her in laws and the parental house and towards the savings from the labour work by her and her husband. However, it is required to be noted that no further evidence is produced with respect to any share received from her in laws. As observed herein above, even the said affidav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 148 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 6-3-2017 - MR. M.R. SHAH AND MR. B.N. KARIA, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MR MANISH J SHAH, ADVOCATE ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1.0. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal passed in ITA No. 446/AHD/2010 for AY 200607, by which, the learned Tribunal has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the assessee, the assessee has preferred present appeal with the following proposed question of law. A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Appellate was the real owner of ₹ 6,38,800/overlooking such overwhelming eviden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dition of ₹ 6,38,800/in the hands of the assessee came to be challenged by the assessee before the learned CIT(A). However, learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee and confirmed the addition made by the AO as unaccounted unexplained cash under Section 69 A of the Act. 2.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned CIT(A), the assessee challenged addition of ₹ 9,48,000/comprising of an amount of ₹ 6,38,800/found from the bedroom of assessee's sister, before the learned ITAT. That by impugned judgment and order, learned ITAT has dismissed the said appeal and has confirmed the addition made by the AO confirmed by the learned CIT(A). 2.3. Feeling aggrieved and dissa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00/in the hands of the assessee. It is submitted that as such the learned Tribunal has disposed of appeal on wrong premises / facts and mainly by observing that no evidence is adduced by her sister of her separation or receiving permanent alimony paid by her husband. It is submitted that it was never the case on behalf of the assessee and / or her sister that aforesaid amount of ₹ 6,38,800/was permanent alimony received by her from her husband. It is submitted that therefore, the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal is perverse, which deserve to be quashed and set aside. 4.0. Heard Shri M J Shah, learned counsel for the assessee at length. We have perused and considered in detailed the order passed by the AO, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ₹ 6,38,800/found in cash from the room where she was sleeping with her husband was received by her from in laws, out of the aforesaid amount, some amount is of Stridhan received from her in laws and the parental house and towards the savings from the labour work by her and her husband. However, it is required to be noted that no further evidence is produced with respect to any share received from her in laws. As observed herein above, even the said affidavit is dated 4.1.2006 i.e. after a period of three weeks. As observed herein above, assessee has stated that out of ₹ 7 to 8 lakh found to be in cash, ₹ 2.25 Lakh belonged to her sister, thus there are material contradiction in the statement of assessee and even the affi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
