TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 66
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as carried out at the business premises of the Assessee on 26.03.2008. Thereafter, the assessment was re-opened by issue of notice under Section 148 on 3.09.2010. In response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act, Assessee filed return of income on 24.10.2012 declaring total income at Rs. Nil. The case was taken for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was framed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act and vide order dated 28.12.2013 the total income was determined at Rs. 28,41,560/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). CIT(A) vide order dated 24.12.2012 dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the Assessee is now in appeal before us and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of assessment proceedings, the A.O observed that the assessee has not attended in spite of several opportunities granted. No details asked for were filed. Hence, there was no option left but to proceed with the assessment on best judgement on the basis of material/information available on records u/s.144 of the IT. Act. During the course of survey proceedings statement of the assessee was recorded on oath u/s. 133A of the I.T. Act. The following facts emerge from the statement recorded u/s.133A of the IT. Act and on subsequent proceedings. The assessee has received cash and cheque for sale of land and has disclosed Rs.43,94,800/- during the course of survey which was a total disclosure and was to give bifurcation year wise. Subsequently,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... period. He had taken contracts to construct house on the Plots which belonged to the appellant. The appellant assessee namely Shantaben Sagar had expired on 05/08/2010. During the course of survey proceeding, Shri Dilip sagar had made disclosure. The disclosure was made based on amount shown as received from parties. The survey team at their own bifurcated the amount received into land sale and cost of construction. No statement was recorded of Smt Shantaben Sagar and Shri Ramesh Ratilal Sagar son of the appellant assessee. The appellant filed return of income showing capital gain at Rs Nil considering the Indexed cost of acquisition. However, the A.O. made addition and taxed it as business income. The appellant did not receive notices but....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hereon at Rs.5 lacs. There is no basis in adopting the said amount. The said amount was taken as best suited to the survey team. By estimating the same, the A.O. has calculated the cost per Sq yards at Rs.29.41, which is too less as compared to market price so also indexed cost of acquisition. 4.0 The A.O. had not considered the loose papers which contained expenses incurred towards land development expenses. 5.0 The addition made by the A.O. is not proper in as much as the statement of the appellant was not recorded in the matter. The survey team had also not recorded statement of Ramesh Ratilal Sagar who had power of attorney for sale of plot on behalf of the appellant assessee. Therefore, when no statement of the assessee are recorded,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ri Dilip Sagar, it is stated that he had given the amount to the appellant which may be over and above the document price. It is the fact that Shri Dilip Sagar was doing construction activity and towards the proposed construction, he had received the sum. No where he had stated that amount was income of the appellant and therefore, nothing can be taxed in the hands of appellant. The appellant had received amount by cash / cheques as per documents executed in favour of concerned parties and therefore when there is no adverse material and shown to the appellant for her comments, nothing can be added legally merely based on statement of third party. 11.0 The Hon'ble CIT Appeals has passed order wherein he has simply taken into consideration t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 8. The learned D.R. submitted that despite various opportunities granted to the Assessee by the AO, Assessee did not appear nor did he appeared before CIT(A). In such circumstances the AO was fully justified in making the addition. He thus supported the order of both the lower authorities. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. From the material on record, it is seen that the assessment was made ex parte under Section 144 of the Act by the Assessing Officer since non attended on behalf of Assessee. Further from the order of CIT(A) it is seen that CIT(A) has fixed the hearing on various days on 5 occasions but none appeared on behalf of Assessee. He therefore proceeded to decided the appeal ex parte. Bef....