TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (2) TMI 851
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the CIT(A)-III, New Delhi has erred by assessing a sum of Rs.341240/- as commission income on 3% on the sale of appellant's own bookings of properties at Rs.11374689/- on estimate basis which is against the facts and circumstances of the case. AY 2002-03 "That the CIT(A)-III, New Delhi has erred by assessing a sum of Rs.299027/- as commission income on 3% on the sale of appellant's own bookings of properties at Rs.9967569/- on estimate basis which is against the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Brief facts are that while deciding the issue raised by the assessee against the addition of Rs.113.75 lakh in AY 2001-02 and addition of Rs.99.68 lakh in AY 2002-03, it was held by the CIT(A) that admitted rate of commission earned by the assessee varies from 1% to 3%. He applied the rate of commission @ 3% on the entire amount of total sales consideration received by the assessee of Rs.113.75 lakh during AY 2001-02 and made addition of Rs.341240 in that year by holding that addition to this extent of commission of Rs.341240 is required to be made in addition to the commission income shown by the assessee. Similarly, in AY 2002-03 it was held by him that ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5 are dismissed and the remaining two appeals of the assessee for Ays 2001-02 and 02-03 are allowed. 8. Now, we take up the appeals filed by the Revenue. First, we take up the appeal of the Revenue for AY 2001-02 i.e. ITA No.1523/Del./2009. Grounds raised by the Revenue read as under: 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in reducing the addition of Rs.1,13,74,689/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unrecorded sale proceeds by Rs.52,38,432/-. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in admitting the additional evidence adduced by the assessee even though sufficient opportunity had been given to him by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in admitting the additional evidence even though the assessee could not prove that he was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the same before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. 4. Whether on the facts and in the circ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssued on 14.9.2007. First reply was stated to be filed by the assessee on 20.12.2007, but there is no mention in the assessment order as to whether any more reminders were issued by the AO during the intervening period. These facts clearly show that there was paucity of time for the assessee to furnish the details required by the AO on 20.12.2007 because the assessment was getting time barred on 31.12.2007. In view of these facts, we are of the considered opinion that additional evidences were rightly admitted by the CIT(A) and we confirm the same because the CIT(A) has duly confronted those evidences to the AO and obtained remand report. 11. Regarding the merit of additions deleted by the CIT(A), we find that the same has been done by the CIT(A) on the basis of remand report of the AO. In para.9 of his order, it is stated by the CIT(A) that in the remand report, the AO himself has submitted that no addition is called for to the extent of Rs.4537967 and to that extent addition was deleted by the CIT(A) on the basis of this remand report of the AO. Out of balance amount of Rs.6840722/, a clear finding is given by the CIT(A) that on the basis of statement of affairs of the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp; 15. Ground nos.5 to 8 read as under: 5. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,27,565/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained investment in property. 6. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.1,27,565/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained investment in property and thus ignoring the valuation report given by the Departmental Valuer. 7. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal." 16. Brief facts are that it is noted by the AO that the assessee has purchased a property at Gurgaon and the cost of investment has been shown at Rs.1743315/-. The AO has referred the matter to the DVO and DVO has valued the investment in the property at Rs.23,38,600/- as against Rs.1743315/- shown by the assessee. The AO has allowed a relief of 20% on the value computed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in admitting the additional evidence despite the objections of the AO in the remand report dated 6.10.2008 (copy enclosed for ready reference). 5. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal. 21. Ld.DR of the Revneue supported the assessment order. Ld.AR of the assessee supported the order of the CIT(A). 22. We have considered the rival submission, we find that in the assessment order, the AO has made addition of Rs.21,55,000/- on account unexplained investment in immoveable properties of Rs.8,64,181 on account of unexplained investment in fixed assets and of Rs.642716/- out of loans given by the assessee and the total addition was made of Rs.36,61,897/- and not of Rs.58,18,242/- as stated by the Revenue in grounds of appeal. Out of this addition, Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the addition to the extent of Rs.2868497/- and he has deleted the addition of Rs.7,93,400/- only which is on the basis of calculation mistake ....