2018 (1) TMI 1406

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. The appellant denies himself liable to be assessed on a total income of Rs. 49,37,270/- as against Rs. 15,08,818/- returned by the appellant under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 34,28,455/- as unexplained income under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The authorities below failed to appreciate the fact that all the transactions had taken place through proper banking channels and no cash was paid to the brokers/parties from whom the shares were purchased. 5. The authorities below erred in treating the share purchase transactions as sham without proper examination under the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eted under the facts of the case. 11. The action of the assessing officer in making additions based on the investigation report of Kolkata Investigation Directorate, which was not put forth to the appellant for rebuttal is unacceptable on the facts of the case. Further, the action of the learned CIT(A) in confirming the additions based on such report is not warranted on the facts and circumstances of the case. 12. The assessing officer has not independently applied his mind to the facts of the case and has merely relied upon the general report made by the Kolkata Investigation Directorate which amounts to borrowed satisfaction, which is impermissible in the eyes of the law and therefore needs to be deleted in the interest ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... having observed that the additions were made on the basis of statement of Mr. Mukesh Choksi without confronting the said statement to the assessee. The Tribunal accordingly restored the matter to the AO with a direction to confront the statement of Mr. Mukesh Choksi to the assessee and thereafter allow him to cross-examine Mr. Mukesh Choksi and the issue may be adjudicated afresh, after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 3. The ld. DR did not dispute these facts. 4. I have carefully examined the order of the lower authorities in the light of the order of the Tribunal on the impugned issue and I find that the impugned issue is squarely covered by the order of the Tribunal in the aforesaid case wherein the Tribunal r....