9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 843X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') dated 20.12.2018. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "(1) The learned CIT Appeals grossly erred on facts of case in confirming addition of Rs.1780500/- on account of LTCG based on unsigned computerized Satakhat (agreement for sale) found during course of survey in premiss of third party lawyer who is unknown tase, without giving an opportunity of cross examining either lawyer or party mentioned in satakhat to prove genuineness of such satakhat, when no details of cash payment is available in satakhat (Agreement for Sale) and wrongly disposing off our objection raised by us stating that payment dates has been mentioned in satakhat as 19-02-2013, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... good case on merit and would suffer prejudice, if the delay in filing of assessees appeal is not condoned and the appeal is not heard on merit. The Ld. AR for the assessee further submits that the addition in case of assessee was made solely on the basis of alleged satakat (agreement to sale) found during the survey action conducted at the business premises of one Vasudev Goplani, Advocate. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that assessee will not get any benefit in filing the appeal belatedly rather there is always chance that may be loose such application. 3. On the other hand, Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Ld. Sr-DR) for the Revenue submits that the cause of delay explained by Ld. AR for the assessee is artificial and based o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctions of sale of immovable property. On the said satakat the consideration of property was allegedly recorded at Rs.59 lakhs, however, the sale consideration shown by assessee in the sale deed was only Rs.21,69,000/-. The assessee was having ½ share in the said property. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer after recording the reasons for reopening that income of assessee escaped assessment, the case of assessee was reopened. Notice under section 148 was issued to the assessee on 30.03.2018. The assessee filed his letter dated 14.10.2018 intimated the Assessing Officer that he has filed return of income on 07.09.2018 in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. The ld AR for the assessee submits that during assessment, the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered the submissions of both the parties. I find that Assessing Officer reopened the case of assessee on the basis of copy of satakat found at the business premises of Vasudev Goplani, Advocate during survey proceedings. The Assessing Officer made addition of long term capital gain, solely on the as per the details available on satakat, though, on the assessee flatly denied his he connection with the alleged satakat. The NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition without giving any independent finding and simply held that Assessing Officer has rightly came to the conclusion for making addition of Rs.17,80,500/-. I find that Assessing Officer solely relied upon the documents found at the business premises of third-party. The Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
