TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1218
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....addition of Rs. 6,27,000/- on account of unaccounted investment and interest income accrued on FDR of Rs. 6,00,000/- from Bansal Credits Limited on account of undisclosed income. The CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the ground of appeal of Appellant on the basis of relying that the FDR of Rs. 6,00,000/- belongs to Appellant and investment in it were made from her undisclosed sources as well as the interest on FDR amounting to Rs. 27,000/- belongs to Appellant. The addition made on this ground was purely on the basis of assumption, surmises and conjectures of the Assessing Officer without any iota of evidence, cogent material or corroborative evidence in the hands of Department. The addition made on this account is totally unjustified, arbitrary, flagrantly contrary to the principle of natural justice hence the addition on this account should be deleted as the same is bad in law." "ITA NO.6624/DEL/2014 (AY 2008-09) 1. That the Learned CIT (A) has erred both in law and on facts of the case in sustaining the addition of Rs. 3,64,545/- on account of unaccounted investment and interest income accrued on FDR from Bansal Credits Limited on account of undisclosed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stified, arbitrary, flagrantly contrary to the principle of natural justice hence the addition on this account should be deleted as the same is bad in law. 2. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred both in law and on facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 17,00,000/- as income from undisclosed sources. The addition made on this ground is purely on the basis of assumptions, surmises and conjectures without any iota of evidence, cogent material or corroborative evidence in the hands of Department. The addition made on this account is totally unjustified, arbitrary, flagrantly contrary to the principle of natural justice hence the addition of Rs. 17,00,000/- on this account needs to be deleted in full as the same is bad in law. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred both in law and on facts of the case in confirming the addition on adhoc basis to the extent of Rs. 1,00,000 expenditure met from undisclosed sources in the marriage of her daughter. The addition made on this ground is purely on the basis of guess work, assumptions, surmises and conjectures without any iota of evidence, cogent material or corroborative evidence in the hands of Department. Therefore addition ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bank and Rs. 10,75,000/- were paid by Ajay, husband of the assessee. Declining the contentions raised by the assessee, AO treated the amount of Rs. 17,00,000/- paid by the assessee to her husband as unexplained investment and thereby made the addition thereof to the income of the assessee. AO also noticed form the seized material that during the year under consideration, marriage of daughter of the assessee was solemnized and three functions were organized viz. Mata ki Chowki at the residence at Faridabad, Ring Ceremony at Hotel Mansingh Palace, Jaipur and marriage ceremony at Hotel Rajputana Sheraton whereas household withdrawals were to the tune of Rs. 1,12,402/-. Declining the contentions raised by the assessee, AO estimated the expenses to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/- on videography, flower decoration etc. from the undisclosed sources and made addition thereof to the income of the assessee. 8. Assessees carried the matter by way of appeals before the ld. CIT (A) who has partly allowed the appeals. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeals. 9. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... residing in USA for purchasing FDRs to be spent by her as and when she visits India. So, for this amount also, except confirmation no document has been brought on record by the assessee to prove as to how this amount was transferred to the assessee or if the sister of the assessee was in possession of such an amount with her. So, we are of the considered view that there is no scope of interference in the findings returned by ld. CIT (A) who confirmed the addition of Rs. 6,00,000/- and Rs. 3,00,000/- for AYs 2007-08 & 2008-09 respectively as unexplained income of the assessee. So, in these circumstances, grounds no.1 in AYs 2007-08 & 2008-09 are determined against the assessee. 13. So far as additions of Rs. 76,008/- and Rs. 44,253/- for AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are concerned, in the light of the findings returned in the preceding paras, when the principal amount is held to be belonging to assessee as unexplained income, interest accrued thereon also belongs to the assessee. So, in these circumstances, grounds no.1 in AYs 2009-10 & 2010-11 are determined against the assessee. GROUND NO.2 IN ITA No.6626/Del./2014 (AY : 2010-11) 14. Assessee by filing an application under Ru....