TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 1156
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,20,121/- on account of unexplained investment in jewellery. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any / all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal. 3. The grounds raised in Revenue's ITA No. 399/Del/2014 (AY 2010-11) read as under:- 1. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,28,89,000/- on account of unexplained cash credit. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any / all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal. 4. The grounds raised in Assessee's ITA No. 465/Del/2014 (AY 2009- 10) read as under:- 1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 18,00,000/- on account of unexplained credit ignoring the fact that the appellant has submitted all the documents related such as PAN card, bank statement etc. to the alleged unexplained credit during the appellate proceedings. Thus, order of the Ld. CIT(A) passed merely on surmises and conjectures should be reversed and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sment u/s. 143(3)/153A making the following additions/ disallowances. i) Addition of Rs. 76,79,021/- on account of unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. ii) Addition of Rs. 1,68,000/- on account of house hold expenses. iii) Addition of Rs. 3,70,121/- on account of unexplained investment in jewellery. 8. Against the aforesaid assessment order dated 27.12.2011, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned Order dated 01.11.2013 has partly allowed the appeal of the asseseee. 9. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue as well as Assessee are in appeals before the Tribunal. 10. Ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO and reiterated the grounds of appeal raised in the Revenue's appeal and requested that appeals of the Revenue may be allowed by cancelling the order of the Ld. CIT(A). To support his case, he filed the copy of the Written Submission, the contents of the written submission are reproduced hereunder:- "Sub: Written Submission in the above case- reg. In the above case, it is humbly submitted that the following decisions may kindly be considered: 1. Toby Consu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court held that where assessee failed to prove identity and capacity of subscriber companies to pay share application money, amount so received was liable to be taxed under section 68. 6. CIT Vs N R Portfolio Pvt Ltd (29 taxmann.com 291) where Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that if AO doubts the documents produced by assessee, the onus shifts on assessee to further substantiate the facts or produce the share applicant in proceeding." 11. In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor her authorized representative appeared to prosecute the matter in dispute, nor filed any application for adjournment. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue involved in the present Appeal, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served to issue notice again and again to the assessee, therefore, we are deciding the present appeals exparte qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records. 12. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records and the case laws relied upon by Ld. DR. After going through the case laws cited by the Ld. DR, we are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uced to substantiate and transactions made with this entities. Therefore amount of Rs. 7679021/- credited to the bank account of the assessee, is considered being unexplained funds belonging to the assessee introduced in her bank account. No account details of this entity are filed in this office in the course of assessment proceedings nor has any person been produced to justify the transactions and to explain the genuineness of the transactions and source of funds. Creditworthiness of these entities/ person has also not been proved by furnishing documents in respect of financial status of these person/ entities. Therefore, source of funds credited in the bank account of the assessee is held as unexplained and unsubstantiated being unexplained cash credits in the bank account of the assessee. 4.10.2 The AR has submitted that most of the entries listed by the AO in his order are in respect of transactions with her husband which have been duly reflected in the books of accounts as well as in his bank accounts. A chart has been given by the AR at Page 25 of the paper book giving the name of the person with whom transaction has been entered into. From the same it is seen that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has brought to tax Rs. 3,17,121/- as unexplained income in the hands of the assessee representing unexplained investment in jewellery. The AR has submitted that the difference in the total jewellery declared in the Wealth Tax Return of A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10 was due to increase in the value of jewellery and as such there was no purchase of jewellery during the year. He therefore submitted that there is no case of holding that any undisclosed investment has been made in the jewellery. 4.12.2 I have considered the submissions of the AR. Nothing of substance have been submitted during the appeal proceedings to show that the difference in the value of amount of jewellery shown in the Wealth Tax Return of A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10 was on account of difference in the valuation of the jewellery. No valuation report has been submitted nor any list has been. submitted showing item wise increase in the value ofjewellery. In view of this I do not find any demerits in the action of the AO. The addition therefore is deserves to be retained. It is however, noted that even in the absence of documentary evidences it cannot be completely denied that-there could be increase in the v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dered view that Ld. CIT(A)'s action in confirming the addition of Rs. 18 lacs was relating to Ms. Sonia Bassi as unexplained since no confirmation has been filed either at the assessment stage or at the appeal stage. The balance addition made under this head was rightly deleted, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) on the addition in dispute and dismiss the ground no. 1 raised by the Revenue. 13.1 With regard to addition on account of unexplained investment in jewellery is concerned, we find that the AO has made an addition of Rs. 3,70,121/- as unexplained investment in jewellery. It was observed that there is a rise in the value of jewellery by Rs. 3.70 lacs in the return of wealth filed for the present assessment year as compared to the return filed for A.Y. 2008-09. The AO has noted that the assessee has not submitted any details showing the source of funds used in acquiring the extra jewellery. Therefore, he has brought to tax Rs. 3,17,121/- as unexplained income in the hands of the assessee representing unexplained investment in jewellery. We note that before the Ld. CIT(A) the AR has submitted that the difference i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed by the assessee on 31.3.2011. Thereafter, a questionnaire issued under section 142(1) on 19.9.2011 alongwith notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act,. 1961. In response thereto, the A.R. of the assessee attended the assessment proceedings in compliance to notices under section 142(1) & 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and furnished information called for from time to time alongwith necessary documents. After examining the all the documents the AO completed the assessment u/s. 143(3)/153A making the following additions/ disallowances. i) Addition of Rs. 1,28,89,000/- on account of unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. ii) Addition of Rs. 1,80,000/- on account of house hold expenses. iii) Addition of Rs. 43,34,185/- on account of unexplained investment in jewellery. 15. Against the aforesaid assessment order dated 27.12.2011, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned Order dated 01.11.2013 has partly allowed the appeal of the asseseee. 16. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue as well as Assessee are in appeals before the Tribunal. 17. Ld. DR relied upon the order of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... him. The AR submitted that all the evidences which were available with the assessee in order to establish the genuineness of the loans taken were furnished before the AO which also contained the PAN. All the transactions were very appearing in the bank accounts. Since no further query was raised by the AO, the appellant's AR might not have submitted are details to the AO. He further submitted that the all the details have been submitted during the appeal proceedings along with the additional evidences. The AO has not given any report on the same. He therefore submitted that it would be a miscarriage of justice if addition is made inspite of providing complete details of the lenders and their confirmations. 4.10.4 There is no way to rebut the claim of the AR that the AO has not raised any further query after receiving the confirmations etc. from the appellant's AR. There is no record to show that he requested the appellant to make any further submissions. The assessment order does not give true picture of the proceedings as it is incorrect to say that no details of the credit transactions were filed when the assessment folder itself contains confirmations, bank stateme....