TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (6) TMI 654
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....leted assessment of the assessee was reopened on the basis of the information received from Dy. CIT, Central Circle-19, New Delhi which referred money lending activity carried out by one Brij Mohan Gupta, in whose case, search operation was carried out on 15-12-2004 under section 132 of the Income-tax Act. The said letter of Dy. CIT enclosed two lists containing the names of the parties who have received cash loans from Hundies and also names of the parties who had advanced cash loans from Shri Brij Mohan Gupta. The transactions worth Rs. 49 lakhs were, on the basis of the contents of the said letter, observed to have been carried out between the assessee and Shri Brij Mohan Gupta; statements on oath of Shri Brij Mohan Gupta, his son and hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is son and the accountant, which were never provided to the assessee for rebuttal nor was any opportunity granted to the assessee to cross-examine the deponents; that even though the matter was remanded by the CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer for doing the needful, the situation remained much the same and the addition remained made without opportunity to the assessee despite repeated requests in this regard by the assessee. Reliance has been placed on the following case law : (1)CIT v. Pradeep Kumar Gupta [2008] 303 ITR 95 (Delhi); (2)CIT v. Rajesh Kumar [2008] 306 ITR 27 (Delhi) (3)CIT v. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 105 (Delhi) (4)CIT v. SMC Share Brokers Ltd. [2007] 288 ITR 345 (Delhi) (5)S.C.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, once again, no such opportunity was provided to the assessee. 7. It was on these facts that the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition. The learned CIT(A) further observed that the Assessing Officer had failed to establish any case against the assessee, nor was any corroborative evidence gathered by the Assessing Officer in relation to the assessee. The Assessing Officer, as observed by the learned CIT(A), merely summarized the salient features of the assessment proceedings relating to Brij Mohan Gupta and thereafter, summarily rejected the reply of the assessee as not acceptable. Though the Assessing Officer referred to the statement of Brij Mohan Gupta and others admitting their involvement in cash loan transactions, these statements w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1)Anima Investment Ltd. (supra); (2)Rohtas Projects Ltd. (supra); (3)Raj Kumar Jain (supra); and (4)Smt. Neena Syal (supra). 12. In Anima Investment Ltd. (supra), the Third Member Bench of the Tribunal held that the powers of the Tribunal in the matter of setting aside an assessment cannot be exercised to allow the Assessing Officer to make up the deficiency of his case. 13. In Rohtas Projects Ltd. (supra), another Third Member Bench of the Tribunal held that the Department cannot be given a fresh innings in the absence of any material brought on record by the Departmental authorities. 14. In Raj Kumar Jain (supra), yet another Third Member Bench of the Tribunal held that if the additions are not supported by evidence, it ....