9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the A.Y. 2006-07, the property involved is the same and there was no evidence of payment of ₹ 10,00,000/- by the assessee, we hold that no further addition is required to be made in the instant assessment year. In view of these facts, the order of the ld. CIT(A) cannot be sustained. Appeal of assessee allowed. - ITA No. 5748/Del/2018 (Asstt. Year: 2008-09) - - - Dated:- 27-10-2021 - Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Assessee by: Sh. R. S. Singhvi, CA Revenue by: Sh. Ratan Singh, Sr. DR ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-31, New Delhi dated 31.07.2018. 2. Follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Sh. S N Arora/Sapra (AROPS5550E, ASEPS5018G) for the A.Y. 2008-09 {Paper Book page no. 31] The Addl. Director Income Tax (inv.), Unit-V, New Delhi vide his letter F.No.Addl . DIT(Inv.)/U-V/2011-12/251, dated 16.03.2012 had sent a report in the case of Sh. S N Arora / Sapra. As per the investigations made, the assesse had deposited unaccounted cash in his Bank account and also made large investment in assets. The details are as follows:- 1. Unexplained cash deposit: A.Y. 2008-09 ₹ 55,03,285/- 2. Unexplained investments: ₹ 56,00,000/- Total ₹ 1,11,03,285/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been grossly erroneous as at the first instance there were no such cash deposits of ₹ 55,03,285/- in the bank account. Further, an amount of ₹ 37,96,000/- has been deposited through cheques which pertain to regular course of business of the assessee. Hence, in view of the erroneous reasons recorded on account of unexplained cash deposits by the Assessing Off icer, the addition made on this account cannot be upheld. 6. The second issue pertains to receipt of ₹ 56,00,000/- received by the assessee vide agreement dated 10.04.2007 with one Sh. Ni lamber Rudrapal for property No. 1481, C.R. Park, New Delhi. This same transaction has been treated as unexplained investment in the A.Y. 2006-07 based on the collaboration agreeme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ying tactic adopted by the assessee. 2. During the year under consideration, the assessee claimed to have derived income from business and profession only. 3. As per the information received from Addl. Director Income Tax(Inv.), Unit.-V New Delhi vide his letter F.No.Addl. DIT(Inv.)/UV/ 2011-12/251 dated 16-03-2012 that the assessee had deposited unaccounted cash in his bank account amounting to ₹ 28270090/- during the financial year 2005-06 and had made investments amounting to ₹ 9400000/- from unexplained sources, the case was reopened u/s 148 of the I.T. Act 1961 and notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued to the assessee on 26.03.2013. In response to which vide order sheet entry dated 28-01-2014, it has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iculars of such income within the meaning of explanation 1 to sub-section 1 of section 271 (1)(c) of I.T Act is initiated in this case. 4. It is also pertinent to mention that the source of the following investments amounting to ₹ 9400000/- made by the assessee during the relevant period have remained unexplained, as such the same is also added back to the income of the assessee u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. S.No. Description of Investment Amount 1. Agreement dated 08.06.2005 with Shri Gurdev Singh for property No. 493, E-Block, Greater Kai lash-II, New Delhi ₹ 4800000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
