9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see both aggregating to Rs. 13.00 Lakhs as unexplained income u/s.68 of the I T Act. 3. The ld. CIT(A) failed to note that the appellant received Rs. 9.00Lakhs and Rs. 3.00 Lakhs both aggregating to Rs. 12.00 lakhs from the HDFC Bank Account of Assessee's brother Sri. ANND Srinivas and confirmation of Transfer of the amount from the Banker was filed on record and therefore CIT(A) erred assessing the sum as undisclosed income. 4. The ld. CIT(A) failed to note that the identity of the Assessee's brother, source and genuineness of the transaction since was established the addition u/s. 68 of the Act is bad in law. 5. The ld. CIT(A) further failed to note that assessee had savings of Rs. 1.00 Lakh which was also not considered and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned addition. 13. The ld. AO thus erred in initiating the Proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act and in making addition of Rs. 15.48 Lakhs in a routine manner without application of the facts and the evidence on record. 14. The ld. AO therefore ought to have noted that Proceedings initiated for Assessment u/s. 147 of the Act based on conjectures, suspicion and guesswork without any evidence or material on record is bad in law and the order requires to be annulled/vacated. 15. For these and other grounds that may be urged before the disposal of the appeal, Assessment Order be held as bad in law and the order be quashed. 1.1. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 12 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment was getting time barred, the AO completed assessment treating loss of Rs. 15,48,151/- as income of the assessee and brought it to tax. 2.1. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) stating that the ITO has converted the actual short term loss on shares as income in spite of documentary evidence brought to the notice of the ITO and the ITO had passed order within a day of calling for information pertaining to10 years back and hence sufficient time was not given for producing the information. The CIT(A) took the information filed by assessee into consideration and called for a remand report from the AO. The AO submitted the remand report stating that the assessee has not furnished information called for and also th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... khs. The CIT(A) observed that there is no confirmation from donor Sri Annd Srinivas and also that there is no proof of assessee's own savings. He therefore held that this is required to be added to the returned loss. He directed AO to compute the assessed loss at Rs. 2,48,151/-. 3. Against the order of CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The Ld.Counsel for assessee submitted that the additional ground is against the validity of re-assessment proceedings and the grounds being legal, they should be admitted and adjudicated. 5. Ld.DR however, opposed the admission of additional grounds of appeal stating that the assessee did not raise any objections to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, nor did she raise any grounds before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ghosalkar vs. ITO-ITAT Pune Bench. iii. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Mohmed Juned Dadani reported in 355 ITR 172 (Guj.). iv. Dr Devendra Gupta vs. ITO reported in 282 ITR (A.T.) 18 (ITAT)(Jodh.). v. Hon'ble AP High Court in the case of Perla Krishna Rao vs. ITO and another reported in 159 ITR 299 (AP). 9. Ld.DR, on the other hand, supported the order of the AO and submitted that the AO had received information that the assessee has made transactions worth Rs. 43,96,84,412/- and there was sufficient material before him to believe that there is escapement of income since the assessee had not filed her return of income. He submitted that since turnover of the assessee was more than Rs. 40 lakhs, the tax audit report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... but the said addition has been deleted by the CIT(A). Thus, the decisions cited by the Ld.Counsel for the assessee are not applicable to the case before us. The IT(A)'s acceptance of assessee's contention does not fail the validity of the reassessment proceedings itself. Therefore, the additional grounds of appeal raised by assessee are rejected. 10.1. As regards the merit of the addition is concerned, assessee's source of investment of Rs. 13,00,000/- has not been accepted by the CIT(A). The assessee has filed the Certificate of the bank wherein it is certified that she had received the funds through banking channels from her brother. The only reason for not believing the said transaction, is that the assessee has not filed confirmation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
