2016 (4) TMI 571

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Officer of Rs. 4 lacs on account of Gift received by the assessee who treated it as bogus one. 2. That the ld. Assessing Officer initiated and completed the assessment proceedings wrongly, has crossed his jurisdiction by way of involving himself into reassessment proceedings rather than completing the assessment on the basis of seized material. Therefore, the entire proceedings of the Assessing Officer are invalid, beyond the scope of section 153A. 3. That the Revenue Authorities completed the assessment and appellate proceedings with pre conceived motion and without affording adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 4. That the appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend or dele....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....relationship between the donor and the assessee(done), and the gift deed submitted by the assessee was incomplete. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. AO the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the ld. AO on the ground that Shri Anil Kumar Saha, the husband of the assessee, had accepted during the search operation and assessment proceedings, in his case, that the gift received by him was bogus, and he had surrendered the amounts for taxation. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us now. 4.1 The ld. AR submits that the assessee had received the gift amounting to Rs. 4 lacs from her first cousin. The ld. AR further submitted that as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he rejoinder submitted that there has been no statement of the assessee that was recorded during the search proceedings. It was the statement of her husband, being Anil Kumar Saha that was recorded. Shri Anil Kumar Saha has admitted the gifts to be not genuine and had surrendered the amounts for taxation which is not the case of the assessee. The ld. AR further submitted that it is also not disputed by the Revenue that any assessment was pending in respect of the relevant assessment year of the assessee. He, therefore, prayed for deletion of the addition made by the ld. AO. 7. We have perused the recorded filed before us, orders passed by the authorities below and the decision relied upon by the ld. AR. 7.1 It is apparent from the ord....