TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 1315
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in law the learned CIT(A)-1, Nashik erred in enhancing the appellants income without giving the notice and opportunity of hearing, this being a patent irregularity the order passed by CIT(A)-1, needs to be quashed to the extent of such enhancement. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the lower authorities have erred in marking an addition of Rs. 22,34,975/- on account of cash deposit in Bank on adhoc basis and further CIT(Appeals) - 1, Nashik has erred in enhancing the same addition by another Rs. 22,35,000/- to the income of the assessee by disregarding appellant contention in this regard. 3. The ground of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee is not pressed and hence, the same is dismissed as not pres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f two persons. The assessee could not produce the return of income, PAN number and computation of income of the said persons as they were claimed to be the farmers and the cash paid by them was from agricultural produce only. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee was thus, asked to produce 7/12 extract, bills/vouchers of agricultural produce, etc. Both the persons attended the office of Assessing Officer and confirmed the cash given. An affidavit was filed, but no bills / vouchers were produced in respect of agricultural income. The Assessing Officer observed that cash had been paid by the said persons, but the source of cash paid, genuineness of transactions and creditworthiness of persons could not be established and ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h receipts against the agreements to sell. In other words, he accepts the transaction, but disputes the amount which had no basis. Attention was drawn to the agreement dated 14.01.2010 placed at pages 21 and 22 of the Paper Book and it was pointed out that the said agreement was executed by two persons who were the co-owners. Further, total price was Rs. 90 lakhs, against which the amount was Rs. 45 lakhs. He further pointed out that the amount was also received by co-owners and the same was deposited in both the accounts. In the case of co-owners, the assessment has been completed by passing an assessment order, wherein no additions were made. However, in the case of assessee, the plea has not been accepted. The learned Authorized Represen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....persons was filed before the CIT(A) and is available at pages 4 and 5 of the Paper Book. The Assessing Officer in this case, after going through the evidence filed by the assessee had accepted the transaction partially i.e. 50% of the amount received in cash by the assessee was accepted to be as per the explanation of assessee to have been received from the said two persons. When the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), he issued enhancement notice to the assessee and the complete amount deposited in cash in the bank account was added as income of the assessee. The summary of cash deposits in the bank account is available at page 15 of the Paper Book, under which sum of Rs. 42,69,950/- has been deposited on various dates ranging from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee and the two persons from whom he had received cash amount which was against the sale of property by the assessee. The Assessing Officer had accepted the cash given by the two persons to the extent of 50%. The CIT(A) on the other hand, reversed the said order of Assessing Officer. Now, the question to be seen is whether the assessee who had entered into an agreement to sell the property has received the amount in cash from known sources. The assessee has furnished on record the complete information in respect of source of availability of cash in the hands of lenders i.e. Mr. Vinod Joshi and Mr. Sanjay Loharkar. Once the sources are known to the assessee and the same have been explained by way of filing confirmations and the rele....