9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 860X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20,00,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 68 of the I. T. Act, 1961 as the Ld. A.O. has made the said addition merely on the basis of information, without proving the investment has been made by the assessee. 3. That the Ld. C.I.T.(A) has erred in sustaining the baseless addition on account of purchase of Equity Shares of Rs. 68,07,900/- as unexplained investment u/s 68 of the I. T. Act, 1961 as the Ld. A.O. has made the said addition merely on the basis of information, without proving the investment has been made by the assessee. 4. For these and other grounds, which may be urged at the time of the hearing, the appeal may be allowed and justice rendered." [B]. Vide Assessment Order dated 31.03.2016 passed u/s 153C r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). The total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 92,07,900/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, additions totaling Rs. 88,07,900/- were made on account of unexplained transactions. The relevant portion of the Assessment Order is reproduced as under:- "2. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was centralized with the Assessing Officer, Central Circle-3, New Delhi vide order dated 13.07.2015 of the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the learned CIT(A) against the aforesaid assessment order dated 31.03.2016 vide the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 23.12.2016. The learned CIT(A) confirmed the aforesaid addition of Rs. 88,07,900/- and dismissed the assessee's appeal. The relevant portion of the order of the learned CIT(A) is reproduced as under: "3.2 In respect of AY 2013-14 he has enclosed copy of the ITR acknowledgement of the return filed on 21.05.2014 manually at ASK and has simply stated as under: Regarding, the additions on account of purchases of Bong/Debentures of Rs. 20,00,000/- and Enquiry Shares of Rs. 68,07,900/- as unexplained investment u/s 68, it is again submitted that the Ld. AO has made the said additions on the basis of merely Individual Transaction Statement downloaded from ITD system of department. Here, it is submitted that Individual Transaction Statement provides only information which may be true or false? No any information may be declared of the assessee without further confirming the transactions from the concerned persons and here the Ld. AO has not done anything regarding the same. Here, I would like to refer the decisions in cases of Dhanalakshmi Pictures vs. CIT [1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 21.05.2014, declaring total income at Rs. 3,99,800/-. The ACIT, Central Circle-3, New Delhi [hereinafter shortly referred to as 'A.O.] issued a notice u/s 153C on 26.08.2015, subsequently, he assessed the total income at Rs. 92,07,700/- vide an assessment order u/s 153C r. w. s. 144 dated 31.03.2016. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) - 23, New Delhi [hereinafter shortly referred to as CIT(A) ] has dismissed the appeal. GROUNDS AND ARGUMENTS 1. Ground No. 1 - That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in sustaining the assessment as 'Best judgment assessment' u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961, as the assessee has not given an opportunity of being heard and a right to question the correctness or the relevancy of the materials on the basis of which the Ld. A.O. proposes to make the best judgment assessment'. Here, It is submitted that the Ld. A.O. has assessed the total income by considering returned income and the Individual Transaction Statement downloaded from ITD system of department only. No opportunity of being heard and a right to question to the correctness or the relevancy of the materials on the basis of which the Ld. A.O. proposes to make the best judgment assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment' u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Ground No. 2 - That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the baseless addition on account of purchase of Bonds/Debentures of Rs. 000/- as unexplained investment u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 as the Ld. A.O. has made the said addition merely on the basis of information, without proving the investment has been made by the assessee'. It is submitted that the Ld. A.O. has made the said addition on account of purchase of Bonds/Debentures of Rs. 20,00,000/- on the basis of merely Individual Transaction Statement downloaded from ITD system of department. Here, it is submitted that Individual Transaction Statement provides only information which may be true or false? No any information may be declared of the assessee without further confirming the transaction from the concerned person, here, M/s Religare Finvest Ltd. and here, the Ld. A.O. has not done anything regarding the same. It is further submitted that the Ld. A.O. has made the said addition saying 'source of I investment remains unexplained' u/s 68 of the I. T. Act, 1961, which is bad in law at all as the section 68 relates to the cash credit recorded in the books of a/c only. Hence, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned CIT (DR) who relied upon the aforesaid assessment order dated 31.03.2016 and the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 23.12.2016 of the learned CIT(A). [F] After hearing the learned CIT DR, and after perusal of the materials on record, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed a speaking order on merits. Relevant portion of the impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A) has already been reproduced in foregoing paragraph [C] of this order. We find that the learned CIT(A) has given detailed reasons for his decision on merits in the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 23.12.2016 of the learned CIT(A). In the written submissions filed by the assessee it has been contended that AO had not given opportunity of being heard. However, this contention lacks credibility on perusal of paragraphs 2 & 3 of the assessment order (already reproduced in foregoing paragraph [B] of this order). On its perusal, we find that the Assessing Officer had provided reasonable opportunity. In the written submissions, the assessee has further contended that the addition of Rs. 20 Lac was made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the learned CIT(A) merely on the basis of individual tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
