9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e addition of Rs. 14,69,000/- on account of unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act on only circumstantial evidence. The addition may pleased be deleted. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) is not justified in confirming addition of Rs. 14,00,000/- as unexplained money when the appellant had discharged its primary burden. The addition may kindly be deleted. 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) is not justified in confirming addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- as unexplained money when the appellant had discharged its primary burden. The addition may kindly be deleted. 4) The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or substitute any ground of appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee's name. The assessee claimed that he carried agricultural activities in the said piece of land and agricultural income was declared at Rs. 4,76,871/- in the assessment year 2008-09. The Assessing Officer was of the view that no person would give advance sum of Rs. 14,69,000/- on basis of unregistered document. It was held by the Assessing Officer that assessee had not received balance amount and in view thereto, the sum of Rs. 14,69,000/- was added as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. The balance cash deposits of Rs. 2,04,000/- had been explained as deposited out of the agricultural receipts of the assessee and the same was accepted by the Assessing Officer. 5. The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee had accepted R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee was incorrect. The assessee furnished additional evidence in the form of legal notice issued to the purchaser along with copy of deed of cancellation of agreement to sell on 26.06.2012 and copy of bank account of Corporation Bank, Pune. In the remand report, the Assessing Officer accepted that the unregistered sale agreement entered into by the Assessee had been cancelled on 26.06.2012 and amount of Rs. 14,67,000/- had been refunded. The Assessing Officer examined additional evidences and also three purchasers from whom advance was claimed to have been received who admitted that they had entered into the transaction. However, against the cheque deposits in their accounts, cash was withdrawan on the next date and hence, Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er hearing both the authorized representatives, the first issue which arises in the present appeal is against addition made u/s. 69A of the Act on account of cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee. The assessee claimed that it had received cash from three different persons against sale of its land and said cash of Rs. 14,69,000/- was deposited in the bank account of the assessee. The Assessing Officer rejected the plea of the assessee since agreement to sell was unregistered. The claim of the assessee was that the said cash was accepted by way of 'Visar Pavati' which was not admitted by the Assessing Officer. Before the CIT(A), the assessee raised plea of cancellation of agreement to sell and remand report were called for. The As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
