2019 (2) TMI 242

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Income Tax (Appeals) ["CIT(A) for short] that the gifts of Resurgent India Bonds ("the Bonds" for short) was not genuine and therefore, the amount in question should be added to the assessee's income in terms of Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short). 2. Through amendment sought, learned counsel for the assessee had raised additional question questioning the jurisdiction of the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax to have acted as an Assessing Officer in the present case. 3. Brief facts are as under:- (a) The appellant assessee is an individual. In the course of the assessment of his return for the assessment year 2003-04, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had received gifts from various sources ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uch details. The Assessing Officer disbelieved the gifts and added such income as assessee's unexplained cash credit in terms of Section 68 of the Act. (b). The assessee carried the matter in appeal. Before the CIT(A), the assessee raised the contention that the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax who had passed the order of assessment was not competent to do so. He relied on Section 2(7A) of the Act. The Commissioner negativated such contention. On merits also, the Commissioner confirmed the view of the Assessing Officer and thus, dismissed the appeal. (c). The assessee carried the matter in further appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by a detailed order, rejected the assessee's appeal. In such order, the Tribunal princip....