9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nto the merits of the issue and has merely confirmed the addition relying on AO's findings. Thus as nothing has been brought on record by the AO to substantiate the allegation that the assessee has entered into the impugned transactions, addition made by the AO without bringing any concrete evidence on record incriminating the assessee is not sustainable - Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri Anikesh Banerjee, JM And Ms Padmavathy S, AM For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CA For the Revenue/Respondent : Shri R.R. Makwana, JCIT ORDER PER PADMAVATHY S, AM: This appeal is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short 'the CIT(A)] dated 20.10.2023 for the AY 2012-13. 2. The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of professional photography. The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2012-13 on 17.09.2012 declaring a total income of Rs. 9,68,017/-. There was a search and survey action in the case of M/s Evergreen Enterprises and during the course of search, statement from one the partners Shri Nilesh Bharana was recorded under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oney u/s 69A of the IT Act, 1961. As the assessee has deliberately concealed the particulars of his income penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are separately initiated for concealment of income. 4. Aggrieved the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The assessee raised a legal contention before the CIT(A), that in the reasons recorded, the AO has stated that the assessee has borrowed loan to the tune of Rs. 21,50,000 whereas while concluding the assessment under section 147, the addition was made stating that the assessee failed to provide details of loans given to Shri Nilesh Bharani. Therefore the assessee contented that the assessment framed under section 147 is bad in law. On merits the assessee submitted that the AO has made the addition without any concrete evidence incriminating the assessee. The CIT(A), did not accept both the contentions of the assessee and upheld the addition made by the assessing officer. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A) raising the following grounds of appeal (Please copy grounds of appeal) 5. The assessee also filed an additional ground before us contending that the assessment ought to have been done under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Accountant have been applied to identify that the assessee is also one of the lender of cash loans to Shri Nilesh Bharani. The ld DR also submitted that AO has linked the assessee with the impugned transactions by decoding the entries in the seized materials and therefore the claim that the addition is made without any basis is not correct. Accordingly the ld DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. There was a search and seizure operations in M/s. Evergreen Enterprises and during the course of search certain documents were seized and statements were recorded. In the documents seized there were entries in a certain format and in the statement recorded the accountant has explained the way in which the entries were to be read. The AO based on the above information was of the view that the entries as tabulated in the earlier part of this order pertains to the cash loans given by the assessee to Shri Nilesh Bharani and accordingly issued notice reopening the assessment. The assessee submitted before the AO that the cash loans as alleged by the AO do not pertain to the assessee and that the assessee has not entered int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en thoughtful consideration to the rival claims of the parties and peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. It is very much clear from the impugned order that the same is an un-reasonable order and passed in cryptic manner, therefore, on this aspect itself, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. However still we want to go to the merits of the case. We observe that the Assessing Officer made the additions mainly on the ground that Shri Nilesh Bharani in his statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act has admitted that he was in the business of lending / borrowing money in cash (unaccounted and undisclosed business). Further, in the course of search, a diary has been seized wherein inter-alia following entries have been recorded and the Assessee s name is also appearing in the same diary in coded word. For clarity ready reference, we are again reproducing the entries relied upon by the Assessing Officer:- i) Code 'E/11/N'- ii) Name as per Ledger 'NENSIBHI ELLA' iii) Coded Amount (in '000) 32500 iv) Contact person 'NANCYBHAI v) F.Y. 2011-12 10. It is an admitted fact that the Assessing Officer has not entertained the Assessee s request for c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
