TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (9) TMI 1208
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....:- (i) Whether in view of seized material indicating payments over and above the disclosed value of the property preponderance of probability of entire value of the property as per the seized sale deed payment @ Rs. 79,00, 000/- should not be taken as real value? (ii) Whether the burden of proof was not on the assessee and whether the assessee has not failed to satisfy the onus upon him? (iii) Whether ITAT has not erred in holding that the assessee had not been confronted with the seized documents especially when the A.O. has clearly shown the documents bearing her signatures and the assessee in her reply, stated that the signatures and the assessee in her reply, stated that the signatures shown to her resem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uce the assessee in person to the Inspector of the Ward or record her statement if she is not in a position to move. Eventually, her statement was recorded at her residence and during recording of statement, she was shown the document bearing her signature and to identify her signatures. She, in the reply, stated that the signatures shown to her resembles with her signatures. The assessing officer taking note of the fact that the assessee had denied the consideration involved in the documents thought it appropriate to make local enquiries to find out the probable consideration involved at that time in the transaction. It was gathered from the enquiries that the consideration as referred to in the documents, that is, Rs. 79 lakhs, looked to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hed with and considered in the context of conscious, willful and deliberate devices adopted by the appellant for concealing vital facts of the matter and for withholding material facts which were within the knowledge of the appellant. 13. The appellant, therefore, cannot be permitted to succeed on the negative approach adopted by her which is contrary to the facts on record and her own submissions in the income tax returns as also in the course of the assessment proceedings. Therefore on the totality of facts of the matter and in view of the principles of natural justice as per the directions of the Hon‟ble ITAT, I am of the considered view that the agreement to sell dt. 14.5.93 is the actual and material evidence in support ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted 5th July, 1997, the purchase consideration was shown as Rs. 9 lakhs. The tribunal referred to its earlier decision that how the matter was remanded and referred to the order passed by the CIT(A) dated 16th January, 2008 whereby the additions were confirmed. The tribunal, as is manifest from the order impugned, took note of the contentions especially that the letters were issued by the assessee on 10th October, 2006, 7th November, 2006, 17th November, 2006, 18th December, 2006, 20th December, 2006, 22nd December, 2006 and 14th June, 2007 to the assessing officer asking to be confronted with the seized material and the fact that though the first appellate authority had accepted the position that it was not possible for the original docume....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ollows:- " 11. In our considered view, the approach adopted by the ld. CIT(A) is against the law. Merely on the basis of an alleged photo copy of a document, it cannot be assumed that the transaction was in fact entered into by the assessee. Definite positive evidence cannot be substituted by alleged photo copies, which have no evidentiary value in law. It cannot be gainsaid that by as many as seven letters (supra) beginning from 1.10.2006 to 14.7.2007, copies whereof have been found placed at pages 54 to 65 of the APB, the assessee repeatedly requested the AO even in the second round, pursuant to the aforesaid directions of the Tribunal to confront her with the seized document. This was not done. Now, the AO, in these circumstance....