9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the amount in question was detected by the AO, who issued notice under Section 148 of the Act calling upon the assessee to account for the said amount, which was apparent from the record. The amount was paid as stamp duties/court fees deposited in the Court in respect of the property which was the subject matter of a dispute. The AO granted opportunity to the assessee to explain the source of the said amount. Its failure to do so resulted in the addition of that amount. The CIT(A) as well as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) affirmed the AO's view. Learned counsel submitted that the assessee was not afforded adequate opportunity to explain the source and that this has resulted in miscarriage of justice. It was argued that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not interested to file any written submission or to defend the contentions raised in the ground of appeal. The appellant was also informed the undersigned is not competent to transfer such appeal from this office and any such transfer order is to be passed by a competent authority. It was also informed that the jurisdiction of their assessment cases has also been transferred w.e.f. 1.4.2013 and that transferring of assessment cases may not automatically lead to transfer of pending appeals from this office to Delhi. Accordingly the appellant was given final opportunity to hearing and the case was fixed for hearing on 21.2.2012. Such notice was sent through speed post at the address given in the appeal memo i.e. form no. 35. Earlier notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No confirmations from the alleged relatives are placed on record by the assessee to justify the averments made in the affidavit. There is also no material on record to place credence on the contention of the assesee that after receipt of stamp duty back as per court's order, the amounts so received were returned back to the alleged relatives. The impugned amount is stated by the assessee to have been received in cash and returned in cash. Therefore, the versions of the assessee were not open for verification. Hence, the contentions of the assesee cannot be given favour to for want of credible evidence and only on the basis of an affidavit of partners not supported by any evidence documentary or circumstantial. In these peculiar facts and ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
