TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (12) TMI 300
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve. While entering into agreement for purchase of land, a sum of Rs. 10 lacs was paid by the appellant. The sources of investment were explained before the AO. 3. After having considered the explanation of the appellant and after verification of total investment, the balance sum of Rs. 66,000 was considered unexplained by the AO and the proposal was sent to the CBDT for reopening the case which was duly approved. The learned authorized representative had assailed initiation of proceedings under s. 147 of the IT Act for escapement of income and subsequently issued notice under s. 148 with the approval of the CBDT. 4. First of all, the learned authorized representative contended that the assessment of the appellant was originally comple....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... vs. ITO (1971) 79 ITR 349 (Cal) 2. Star Automobiles vs. ITO (1989) 78 CTR (MP) 105 : (1989) 178 ITR 613 (MP) 3. Dr. H.K. Mahatab vs. ITO 1978 CTR (Ori) 5 : (1978) 111 ITR 900 (Ori) 9. The AO had not mentioned section under which addition is being made. In this case, the addition was called for to be made under s. 69 which casts heavy burden on the AO. The onus was on the Department to bring the fresh material to disprove the contention of the appellant. 10. The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the authorities below. 11. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant case laws. The contentions of the learned authorized representative are being considered as under: 12. We ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sst. yr. 1961-62 exceeded the amount shown by him i.e., Rs. 54,852 by more than Rs. 50,000. Hence, he could not issue a notice under s. 148 beyond eight years from the close of the asst. yr. 1961-62. The notice was clearly beyond time and invalid. Action under s. 148 was held invalid in the case of Gupta Cold Storage vs. ITO. 14. From the perusal of the facts of the case, we find that in this case it was held that the wooden staging etc. which was valued by the valuation officer at Rs. 64,352 could not be regarded as part of the building. Hence income escaped came to be less than Rs. 50,000 whereas in the case before us, the AO had prima facie entertained the belief and rightly so that the income escaping assessment exceeded Rs. 50,000. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e amount in question was quite petty one and the AO had disallowed the same only with the reason that the lady was maintaining the regular bank account and depositing the savings therein. This cannot be the basis for rejection of explanation. We are of the opinion that the ladies are receiving small gifts from relatives on various occasions. Having regard to the fact and also the smallness of amount of Rs. 4,800, we are of the opinion that the AO was not justified in making the addition of Rs. 4,800 on account of unexplained investment. 19. Rs. 20,000 investment made by Smt. Vijyakumari. The details of loan made by Smt. Vijyakumari are as under: Rs. 12,000 given by her husband late Shri Pushpendrakumar out of his account w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mari. 20. Rs. 20,000 investment made by Shri Rajendra Kumar. The AO submitted that it has been explained that a sum of Rs. 10,000 represented savings from the salary of Shri Rajendra Kumar and Rs. 10,000 was given to Shri Rajendra Kumar by his father who was retired Government servant. An affidavit to this effect was filed by the father of Shri Rajendra Kumar. By considering the totality of the facts of the case, we are of the view that the learned CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 44,800 pertaining to the different source of investment. 21. In this case also, the authorized representative has also contended that it is not evident from the order of the AO whether he intended to make addition under s. 68 or 69 or ha....