9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 1163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .Y. 2013-14. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC-CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming the re-opening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act, which is on erroneous facts, and hence invalid and void ab-initio. 2. That on facts and in law, the learned AO has grievously erred in not providing the adverse materials / statements etc. and also in not providing cross examination of the concerned persons while making the additions under dispute, even though specifically requested for by the appellant. 3. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC-CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 19,65,150/- made under Section 69 of the Act ax u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as per plan 2 being cash of Rs. 1965150/- received from the assessee by J P Iskon group, and a mention that booking is by Girish Dani. The Ld. AO analyzed the data and came to the conclusion that assessee has paid cheque payment of Rs. 45,85,350/- and cash payment of Rs. 19,65,150/- for purchase of property with Iskon Group. The assessee filed objection vide letter dated 12.7.2019 with the Ld. AO with multiple points supported by judicial judgments regarding wrongful belief of the Ld. AO by placing reliance on such loose evidence. The assessee submitted that the crucial link between information made available to the AO and the formation of the belief is absent. It was submitted by the assessee that there is no information or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.12.2019 accept to file the ledger account of J P Iscon Ltd. (Flat) in his books of account. Since it has been esalisbedh beyond doubt that J R1 Iscon is indulged in receiving on money from customer along with the cheque amount, the amount of Rs. 1965150/- shown under plan-2 in the books of J P Iscon represents the cash quantum paid by the assessee. In absence of any corroborative evidence submitted by the assessee, the cash payment of Rs. 1965150/- is treated as unexplained investment of the assessee and added to the total income u/s. 69 of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(C) of the Act are initiated separately for concealment of Income. (Addition : Rs. 19,65,150/-)" 4. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the data on the basis of which the case of the assessee has been reopened. It was submitted before us that name of the assessee is not appearing in any of the data and there is no concrete information on the basis of which the aforesaid additions have been made/sustained in the hands of the assessee. The Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to Pages 55-57 of the Paper Book containing the reasons for reopening the case of the assessee under Section 147 of the Act and submitted that in the aforesaid reasons, the name of the assessee does not find any mention at all. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the so-called reasons for reopening the assessment, there is no document whatsoever mentioning the name of the assessee an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rative evidence. 6. In response, Ld. DR placed reliance on the observations made by assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(Appeals), in their respective orders. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. In our considered view, the Department has not brought forth any concrete evidence to substantiate that the assessee had made payment in cash towards purchase of property in J P Iskon group. From the documents placed on record, it is seen that the name of the assessee has not been specifically mentioned in any of the documents, no document has been found containing the handwriting of the assessee, there is no allotment letter in the name of the assessee which would show that the assessee had paid advance towards boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , before the Settlement Commissioner, with respect to the amount entered in the excel sheet found from the possession of the assistant working with the developer, is sufficient proof of the transaction between the assessee and the developer. 3. We find inherent fallacy in this submission, inasmuch as, there is no basis for conducting proceedings against the assessee merely for the fact that the developer had paid tax on the amount shown in the excel-sheet. There is no adjudication with regard to the payment, which was shown in the excel-sheet to the effect that the same was actually paid by the assessee to the developer. Even otherwise, the concurrent findings returned by the CITA and ITAT are that the document found from the premises of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
