9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 586X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se loans were taken by the assessee in earlier years and the amount of loan are opening balances, both parties are wife and daughter of the assessee therefore, apparently in this case, the addition under Section 69D of the Act cannot be made. So far as the order of the CIT (A) is concerned, as submitted CIT (A) was presented with physical documents before him earlier along with the return submissions which were neither considered nor even mentioned in the appellate order. Therefore, the order of the learned CIT (A) confirmed the addition is not sustainable. AO has also not cared of looking into how the amounts of ₹12,04,971/- is arrived at in fact the amount tabulated by the learned Assessing Officer himself shows that it should be ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te the confirmed addition by the Assessing Officer not to be sustained. 2. The CIT (A) not minutely gone through the order passed by the Assessing Officer and the grounds of appeal placed before him, thus, his observations cannot be considered. 3. the grounds placed under Section 69D, 271E, 271(1)(c) and the application placed under Section 154 before the Assessing Officer though on his record not considered. Thus, his order not maintainable, even the CIT (A) not considered our submissions in this context physically placed before them. 4. Thus requested to set aside both the orders before the eyes of law as the matter be decided on merit with judicial view before your honor. 03. The brief facts of the case shows that the assessee is an indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me of ₹15,34,320/- but started the computation of total income in the assessment order by taking the income offered in the original return of income of ₹14,22,320/-. He made the addition of ₹12,04,971/- and ₹1,12,000/- and by order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 17th March, 2015, assessed the total income of ₹27,39,291/-. 06. Assessee preferred the appeal before the learned CIT (A) on the above two conditions. The learned CIT (A) noted that despite five notices issued to the assessee for hearing, assessee did not availed any opportunity accordingly, on the merits also repeating the observations of the learned Assessing Officer, he confirmed both the additions. Therefore, assessee is aggrieved and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s concerned, it is submitted that the learned CIT (A) was presented with physical documents before him earlier along with the return submissions which were neither considered nor even mentioned in the appellate order. Therefore, the order of the learned CIT (A) confirmed the addition is not sustainable. Further, the learned Assessing Officer has also not cared of looking into how the amounts of ₹12,04,971/- is arrived at in fact the amount tabulated by the learned Assessing Officer himself shows that it should be added ₹11,76,591/-. Further it is apparent that assessee has furnished the confirmation letter and statement of loan before the learned Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. In view of the above facts, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
