TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 399
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in all these appeals by the ld. CITA(A), therefore, for the sake of convenience, we are consolidated these appeals by this common order for the sake of convenience, by dealing with ITA No. 4841/Del/2018 (AY 2014-15) - AJAY GOEL VS. ITO. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed his return of income on 16.10.2014 declaring income of Rs. 8,26,860/- and the same was selected for scrutiny in CASS. Notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act") on 22.9.2015. Subsequently, notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act alongwith questionnaire was issued. In response thereto, assessee's A.R. attended the assessment proceedings from time to time and filed necessary details as called for. During the year, the assessee has shown income fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd not providing the copy of the Investigation report on which the AO has relied, is against the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CIT 127 DTR 0241 and Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT 125 ITR 713 at page no. 714; Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Ashwani Gupta 322 ITR 396. He further submitted that exactly on the similar facts and circumstances the ITAT, SMC, Delhi Bench vide its order dated 06.11.2018 passed in ITA No. 3510/Del/2018 (AY 2014-15) in the case of Smt. Jyoti Gupta vs. ITO the SMC Bench, Delhi has considered the statement of Vikrant Kayan and has held that impugned addition was made on the statement of Sh. Vikrant Kayan without providing any opp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the absence of evidence, it could not be taken that he must have been in charge of the Madras office on October 16, 1946, so as to have personal knowledge. The department ought to have called upon the manager to produce the documents and papers on the basis of which he had made the statements and confronted the assessee with those documents and papers. It was true that proceedings under the income-tax law were not governed by the strict rules of evidence, and, therefore, it might be said that even without calling the manager of the bank in evidence to prove the letter dated February 18, 1955, it could be taken into account as evidence. But before the income-tax authorities could rely upon it, they were bound to produce it before the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vide copies of seized material to the assessee nor had he allowed the assessee to cross-examine the party concerned. The Division Bench held that once there is violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as seized material was not provided to the assessee nor was given opportunity of cross examining the person whose statement was being used against the assessee the order could not be sustained. 295 ITR 105 CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd.(Jurisdictional Delhi HC), in which it was held as under: "Even if the strict rules of evidence may not apply, the basic principle of natural justice would apply to the facts of the case, assessing officer had placed reliance upon the report for deciding the matter against the assessee. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....justice and against the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Andaman Timber vs. CIT decided in Civil Appeal No. 4228 of 2006. For the sake of convenience, I am reproducing the relevant portion of the ITAT, SMC, Delhi Bench vide its order dated 06.11.2018 passed in ITA No. 3510/Del/2018 (AY 2014-15) in the case of Smt. Jyoti Gupta vs. ITO as under:- "13. Merely on the strength of statement of third party i.e. Shri Vikrant Kayan cannot justi fy the impugned additions. Moreso, when specific request was made by the assessee for allowing cross examination was denied by the Assessing Officer. The first appellate authority also did not consider it fit to allow cross-examination. This is in gross violation of the pri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tribunal to have guess work as to for what purposes the appellant wanted to cross-examine those dealers and what extraction the appellant wanted from them. As mentioned above, the appellant had contested the truthfulness of the statements of these two witnesses and wanted to discredit their testimony for which purpose it wanted to avail the opportunity of crossexamination. That apart, the Adjudicating Authority simply relied upon the price list as maintained at the depot to determine the price for the purpose of levy of excise duty. Whether the goods were, in fact, sold to the said dealers/witnesses at the price which is mentioned in the price list itself could be the subject matter of cross-examination. Therefore, it was not for the Adjudi....