9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal, the assessing officer has recorded the statements of Mr.J.Das. He [Mr.J.Das] had categorically stated that he has received only ₹ 2,00,000/- from the assessee. This has been reiterated by the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] proceeded to sustain the addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- deleting the addition of ₹ 18,00,000/-. The statement of Mr.J.Dass being recorded by the assessing officer, now it cannot be contended by the Revenue that no particulars of Mr.J.Dass was available with the assessing officer to comply with the directions issued by the Tribunal. Thus, it was mandatory for the assessing officer to comply with the directions of the Tribunal. The ground of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in deleting the addition made by assessing authority with regard to unexplained investments by erroneous holding that there is no evidence brought on record by assessing authority and no opportunity was granted to assessee to cross examine the witnesses without appreciating the contents of sized proved the unexplained investments made by assessee and assessing authority had made the addition on basis of search materials and not on basis of oral evidence of farmers? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in deleting the addition made by assessing authority with regard to bogus expenditure on lands by holding that the sister c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were seized from the premises of the assessee. After conclusion of search operation, proceedings were initiated under Section 158BC of the Act and called upon the assessee to file its undisclosed income. The block assessment proceedings were concluded by the order passed under Section 158BC read with Section 143[3] of the Act on 13.01.2003. In the said proceedings, the Assessing Officer added certain additions as under: a) Unexplained income from Jansons Mall: ₹ 20 lakhs. b) Unexplained investment in lands at Buttanahalli: ₹ 84,62,805. d) Bogus expenditure claim in respect of the land in Gooliyanandagunda village: ₹ 92,00,200. 6. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. Being aggrieved, this appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the findings of the Tribunal with respect to unexplained investments in Janson mall. Re. Substantial question of law. 9. Learned counsel for the Revenue referring to Section 69C of the Act, submitted that the burden was on the assessee to prove that Mr.J.Dass has received only ₹ 2,00,000/-. Such burden was not discharged by the assessee, no details of the income tax returns and the PAN number relating to Mr.J.Das was furnished by the assessee. Hence, the Tribunal ought to have considered the case on merits. 10. Learned Senior Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Revenue deserves to be negated. 11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record. 12. It is not in dispute that in the first round prior to remand made by the Tribunal, the assessing officer has recorded the statements of Mr.J.Das. He [Mr.J.Das] had categorically stated that he has received only ₹ 2,00,000/- from the assessee. This has been reiterated by the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] proceeded to sustain the addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- deleting the addition of ₹ 18,00,000/-. The statement of Mr.J.Dass being recorded by the assessing officer, now it cannot be conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r.J.Das, but the appellant expressed its inability to furnish any details regarding Mr.J.Das as he was no more. The Assessing Officer has not made any further enquiring at least she would have verified the assessment record of M/s. Reliable Press [Mr.J.Das] which is available in the department if Mr.J.Das used to file his return of income. Despite of the direction of the Hon ble ITAT no verification has been made by the Assessing Officer before passing reassessment order. These facts also raised in the written submission as mentioned above and vide this office letter dated 01.09.2010 the Assessing Officer was asked to submit remand report, however no report received form the Assessing Officer. Thereafter, several reminders were issued but n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
