9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA , JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee : - None - For the Revenue : Shri Vivek Vardhan , Sr. D. R. ORDER PER R. K. PANDA , A. M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.12.2017 of the Ld. CIT(A)-28, New Delhi, relating to the A.Y. 2009-10. 2. Addition of Rs.62,75,000/- made by the A.O. under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) is the only issue raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing when the name of the assessee was called. A perusal of the order sheet entries shows that the assessee was not appearing on the earlier occasions. As many ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee company has transferred the immovable property during the year under consideration but the transactions are not disclosed in the return of income, AO initiated the reassessment proceedings in its case and computed the capital gain by invoking of provisions of section 50C of the Act. Against it, appellant contended that no such property was transferred by it during the year and the alleged sale of industrial plot at Noida was made fraudulently by the general power of attorney holder, Mr. Vinod Kumar Tomar, therefore, no capital gain arises in its hands. However, the facts as emerged during the assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings, narrate the different story and substantiate the stand taken by AO. As per the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... power of attorney dated 10.02.2005 to Shri Tomar to carry out all the agreements/transfers and receive the money on its behalf. Secondly, if the transaction by Shri Tomar were made fraudulently, the appellant could have taken legal recourse against Shri Tomar but the same has not been done. Even when the facts came in the knowledge of appellant company during the assessment proceedings after a long gap of many years, no action was taken by it against Shri Tomar. Only after filing the appeal as on 08.02.2017, a complaint letter dated 01.08.2017, not even FIR, was filed to the SHO, Police Station, Amar Colony, New Delhi mentioning the facts with the request to take action against Shri Tomar. This letter is nothing but an eye wash only just to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dgment of return with computation of income has been filed but no where it shows that the said loan was given by creditor in earlier years and has continued as opening balance in this year. Thus, in absence of any conclusive evidence on behalf of appellant, I uphold the addition made by AO and dismiss the ground taken by appellant. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard the Learned D.R. and perused the record. We find the A.O. in the instant case has made addition of Rs.57,75,000/- being the addition on account of sale of immovable property not disclosed to the Department. Similarly, the A.O. has made addition of Rs.5 lakhs being the unexplained cash credit in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
