9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that there are so many cuttings and no signatures of the concerned Chartered Accountant and the facts as mentioned in Brief Synopsis, proves the contention of the assessee. Reliance by assessee on the judgment of Ravi Kumar [ 2007 (7) TMI 45 - HIGH COURT, PUNJAB AND HARYANA] is clearly applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case that in the absence of any evidence or any other corroborated evidence, no addition could be made in the hands of assessee. DR during the course of hearing has not been able to rebut the agreement of the Ld. Counsel either and, thus, we hold that the document as found belongs to Darshan Kumar HUF and the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition and even no adverse view could be drawn as these are only projected figures. - Dr. M. L. Meena, Accountant Member And Sh. Udayan Dasgupta, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Sh. Ashwani Juneja, ITP For the Respondent : Sh. Rajiv Wadhera, Sr. DR ORDER PER: UDAYAN DASGUPTA, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the department and cross objections as filed by the assessee and cross objections, which were filed by the assessee earlier have been revised by way of letter, dated 27.04.2024 f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een served on all the legal heirs which the AO has miserably failed. Thus, the assessment completed on the basis of issuance of notice u/s 148 is illegal, invalid and bad in the eyes of law and the assessment completed is liable to be cancelled. 4. That the authorities below did not appreciate that this case does not fall within the mischief of section 148. As such the proceedings initiated are bad in law and the assessment is liable to be cancelled. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts an law in rejecting the contentions of the assessee that the alleged balance sheet/ trading account P L account on the basis of which the AO has made the addition on account of alleged unexplained advances received from customers/ addition in capital account and addition in unsecured loans is only a projected balance sheet for which the detailed submissions were filed alongwith the evidence before the CIT(A) but the same has been rejected in arbitrarily manner without rebutting the contentions of the assessee. 6. That any other ground of cross objection which may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal. 4. For the purposes of deciding the appeal, the facts in brief as brought on record and arg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of the assessee that during the course of such survey, certain documents were also found in the name and style of M/s Shri Sai Properties, which name has also been mentioned in the agreement as stated above in the name of Sh. Darshan Kumar HUF and Sh. Harish Kumar and these have been stated to be project report for the purposes of availing of certain borrowings from the financial Institutions. It was further argued by the Ld. Counsel that the HUF was carrying on the business of Real Estate under the name and style of M/s Shri Sai Properties and, as such, no such addition was called for in the hands of Sh. Darshan Kumar (Individual) and for the documents found during survey, the following facts were submitted before us during the course of hearing by the Ld. Counsel:- i). The facts again are that the assessee was intending to develop a colony on the above said land and for that, certain bank guarantees had been given and further, for the purpose of availing certain borrowings from Financial Institutions, a project report was under preparation from the Chartered Accountant, in the name of Shri Sai Properties and which project report is in a very rough manner, with lot of cuttings/o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d documents and it was merely a rough draft. It was further brought to our notice that, though, the Assessing officer had made the addition on account of such projected figures, but the Ld. CIT(A) has held that these are belonging to Darhsan Kumar HUF and deleted the entire addition. It has been argued before us that various documents itself as seized clearly demonstrate that, the notings relate to payment schedule of the borrowings to be made, coupled with the cuttings/ over writings and other facts as mentioned in different pages seized and further, the notings in the document are not belonging to Darshan Kumar (individual), and they are only projected figures and is proved by the notings itself and for which, no adverse view could be drawn. 10. The Ld. DR, however, argued that the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly deleted the addition and relied on the findings of the Assessing Officer. 11. We have considered the order of Assessing Officer, CIT(A), arguments of the Ld. Counsel and the Ld. DR and the brief synopsis and Paper Books filed by the assessee counsel, it is undisputed fact, which is apparent from the order in the case of Sh. Darshan Kumar HUF, for which, a copy has been placed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und belongs to Darshan Kumar HUF and the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition and even no adverse view could be drawn as these are only projected figures. 13. In the revised ground, the assessee had withdrawn the ground of Appeal No. 1 to 4 with regard to issuance of notice u/s 148 and as regards, ground No. 5 is concerned, the same is covered by our finding in the appeal of the department. 14. Ravi Kumar, reported in 294 ITR, page 78 is clearly applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case that in the absence of any evidence or any other corroborated evidence, no addition could be made in the hands of assessee. The Ld. DR during the course of hearing has not been able to rebut the agreement of the Ld. Counsel either and, thus, we hold that the document as found belongs to Darshan Kumar HUF and the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition and even no adverse view could be drawn as these are only projected figures. 15. As such the departmental appeal stands dismissed. 16. In the revised ground, the assessee had withdrawn the ground of appeal No. 1 to 4 with regard to issuance of notice u/s 148 and as regards, ground No. 5 is concerned, the same is covered by our finding in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
