9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 850X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they have received the on-money in cash at ₹ 7,00,000/- and ₹ 1,02,45,000/- over and above the consideration mentioned in the registered sale deed at ₹ 8,40,000/- and ₹ 44,55,000/- respectively. During the course of appearing it has been prayed by the assessee that no opportunity of cross examination was provided to the assessee with Shri Abdul Wahid Khan and Shri Jhanak Singh. Revenue has not raised any objection to this request. We in the interest of justice are of the view that assessee deserves to be given an opportunity to cross examine both the sellers with whom she transacted to purchase immovable property. Unexplained investment in jewellery - Held that:- In view the CBDT Instruction No.1916 dated 11. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities. We accordingly delete the addition of ₹ 64,815/- for the alleged unexplained investment and allow Ground No.2 raised by the assessee. - IT(SS) No.189, 190/Ind/2017 And ITA No.503/Ind/2017 - - - Dated:- 15-1-2019 - MR KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MR MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Smt. Ashima Gupta, CIT For The Assessee : Shri S.S. Deshpande Manoj Ayachit, C.As ORDER PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The above captioned bunch of three appeals filed at the instance of assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09, 2011- 12 and 2012-13 are directed against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 (in short Ld.CIT(A) ], Bhopal dated 21.04.2-017 which are arisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Though the statement of both the above referred persons have been taken by the Ld. A.O but no opportunity of cross examination have been provided to the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee therefore prayed that in the interest of justice an opportunity of cross examination should be given. 7. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative though supported the orders of lower authorities but did not oppose the request of the assessee of providing opportunity of cross examination with the sellers who have stated to have received on-money. 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Assessee is aggrieved with the addition for unaccounted investment of ₹ 7,00,000/- and ₹ 1,02,45,000/- for the al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it along with the remand report. If after the cross examination it is confirmed that the on-money has been paid by the assessee to both the persons at ₹ 7,00,000/- and ₹ 1,02,45,000/- then the impugned addition shall stands confirmed. Needless to mention that reasonable opportunity of being heard should be provided to the assessee. In the result ITA No.189 190/Ind/2017 filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 10. Now we take up ITA No.503/Ind/2017 wherein the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal; 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the assessee summits that having regard to the explanation furnished before the learned lower authorities, the learned CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A) who keeping in view the CBDT Instruction No.1916 dated 11.5.1994 gave the benefit of 800 gram of gold jewellery treating it to be belong to the assessee, her husband and two sons comprising of 500 gram for lady assessee, 100 gram each for three males. 13. Now the assessee is in appeal challenging the remaining amount of addition for 1227 grams of gold jewellery. Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded casually submitted that the assessee belongs to a rich family and such acquisition of gold jewellery are quite reasonable in such families. However we are not inclined to give any benefit to this contention of Ld. Counsel for the assessee as it was not supported by any facts, evidences or any other de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
