9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 863X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maintaining any books of accounts. In the given situation, self serving confirmation by Smt. Yashoda Devi, mother in law of the appellant, does not come to the help of the assessee-appellant. Nowever, taking into consideration income of the assessee during the F.Y. 2016-17 i.e. of Rs. 3,66,224.00 - Rs. 54,000.00 paid to Mohan Broker Agency during said year, we restrict the addition to Rs. 9,08,376 (i.e. Rs. 12,20,600.00 - Rs. 3,12,224.00, source of which she failed to establish, despite reasonable opportunity, before the Assessing Officer and before Ld. CIT(A). Validity of impugned assessment order as no DIN Number was generated as regards the assessment order - Record reveals that while challenging the impugned assessment order before Learned CIT(A), no such ground/objection on behalf of the assessee-appellant was raised. Even though this is a legal ground and can be raised before the Appellate Tribunal, it was for the assessee-appellant to prove to the satisfaction of this Tribunal if any prejudice has been caused to the assessee-appellant due to non mentioning of DIN number. Instructions issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes are meant for compliance by the Income Tax Authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 31.12.2019.The impugned assessment order is dated 30.12.2019. It is available from the abovesaid letter dated 31.12.2019 that on receipt of letter dated 30.12.2019 from the office of DCIT, Central Circle, forwarding therewith draft assessment orders, mentioned therein, for approval u/s 153D of the Act, Additional Commissioner of Income Tax went through the contents of draft assessment orders and accorded approval u/s 153D of the Act. In view of the said document submitted by the appellant, there is no merit in the contention raised on behalf of the assessee-appellant. - Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, AM And Shri Narinder Kumar, JM For the Assessee : Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. And Sh. Hemang Gargieya, Adv. For the Revenue : MS. Alka Gautam, CIT ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER The above captioned appeal has been filed by Smt. Kavita Samtani while challenging order passed by ld. CIT(Appeal), relating to Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Vide impugned order, ld. CIT(Appeal) has upheld the assessment and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 3. Vide impugned assessment, total income of the assessee has been assessed at Rs. 14,89,400/- by making 2 additions i.e. one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e been made in cash to the vendors, namely, Shri Atul Kumar Surana and Smt. Kanta Devi Sadhwani. Considering all this, Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee had no explanation regarding the source of this investment of Rs. 12,20,600/- Accordingly, an addition u/s 69 was made to the total income of the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer recorded his satisfaction that the assessee had concealed her income particulars within the purview of provisions of Sec. 271AAB(1A) for A. Y. 2016-17. Notice u/s 271AAB (1A) r.w.s. 274 was accordingly directed to be issued. 10. As regards the other addition, Assessing Officer observed: The assessee's A/R simply brushed aside the issue by saying that this is only related to M/s Mohan Broker Agency (a concern of her husband, Shri Deepak Samtani), but ignored this issue that she has credited a sum of Rs. 54000 /- in the said account of her husband but source of which has not been explained. Hence, considering the same as her unexplained investment u/s 69 of the L, T Act, an addition of Rs. 54000 /- is made to the total income for A.Y. 2016-17. Assessing Officer also observed that in view of violation of provisions of Sec. 271AAB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce has also been placed on copy of statement of account of M/s Mohan Broker Agency available at pages No. 48 to 50 of the paper book. 15. Available at page No. 10 to 12 of the paper book is copy of reply dated 08.12.2019 from appellant to the ACIT, in response to notice dated 07.12.2019. In para No. 9 of the reply, the appellant claimed to have availed of unsecured loan of Rs. 4,76,000/- from M/s Mohan Broker Agency. As per copy of Balance Sheet (page Nos. 44 and 45 of the paper book) of M/s Mohan Broker Agency, as on 31.03.2016, Smt. Kavita Samtani availed of loan facility of Rs. 4,76,000/- on 31.03.2016. In this situation, when the appellant brought material on record, Assessing Officer was required to consider the same, but while passing the assessment order, the Assessing Officer appears to have not considered said material placed on record by the assessee in support of her version regarding repayment of Rs. 54,000/- to M/s Mohan Broker Agency. It remains unexplained as to on what basis said addition of Rs. 54,000/- was made by the Assessing Officer. Learned CIT(A) observed in para 5.2.6 of the impugned order that just before transfer of said cash of Rs. 30,000/-and Rs. 24,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Devi to the appellant, payment of cash of Rs. 12,20,600/-to Atul Kumar Surana for purchase of the abovesaid property of Suwana remained unexplained. As further observed by Ld. CIT(A) in absence of any supporting evidence, it was not established that said cash withdrawn from the bank account of Smt. Yashoda Devi was advanced to the appellant. 17. Available on record is of statement of account of Smt. Kavita Samtani in the ledger of Hari Om Agency. As per said statement of account, on 29.02.2016 and 01.03.2016, a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- and a sum of Rs. 5,40,000/-are shown to have been debited. 18. Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that ld. CIT(A) did not correctly appreciate the entries, the reason being that the said amounts were transferred from Dena Bank account to the account of Smt. Yoshada Devi, who in turn withdraw the said amount from her bank and paid to the joint sellers, Sh. Atul Kumar Surana and Smt. Kanti Devi Surana, and as such, there was no incriminating material which can be said to be there to to make additions. In this regard, firstly, it may be mentioned that payment of the sale consideration in cash to the vendors for purchase of immovable property was clearl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that the matter as regards impact of non mentioning of DIN number, as per instructions issued by CBDT is pending adjudication before the Hon ble Supreme Court, and as such, there is no merit in the contention on behalf of the assessee-appellant. 23. The said instructions were issued vide Circular No. 19/2019 dated 14.08.2019. 24. As regards the decisions cited, it may also be mentioned that Ld. AR has not provided full text of any of the above said decisions. Only certain portions of some of the decisions have been extracted in the written submissions. As regards, three decisions mentioned in para 2.5 of the written submissions, what to say of providing of Full text thereof, even no portion or relevant paragraph thereof has been reproduced or extracted in the written submissions. 25. Admittedly, the point in issue is sub judice before Hon ble Supreme Court of India after a decision by Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Brandix mauritious holding limited, ITA No. 163/2023, decided on 20.03.2023. 26. Record reveals that while challenging the impugned assessment order before Learned CIT(A), no such ground/objection on behalf of the assessee-appellant was raised. Even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded from being taken into consideration. 30. It may be mentioned here that full text of the abovesaid decisions cited by Ld. AR of the appellant has not been provided. Only portion from the said decisions have been incorporated in the written submissions. 31. Copy of the assessment order made part of the appeal filed by the assessee-appellant is a photocopy of the copy supplied to the assessee. It purports to bear signatures of DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer-Assessing Officer. The original assessment order is stated to forming part of the original record pertaining to assessment proceedings. Exact copy of the said original order has not been made available. In absence thereof, it is difficult to say if this is a case of any violation of the provisions of section 282A of the Act. In the written submissions reference has been made to instruction N0.6 dt. 3.10.2017, requiring the Income tax authorities to digitally sign the assessment order, demand notice and computation sheet etc. Instruction No.1/18 dated 12.2.2018 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes has also been relied on in the written submissions to submit that all departmental orders/notices/communications issued to the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
