TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 154
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder of Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,09,80,369/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of gain on sale of investment. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any/all grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." ITA No. 522/Del/2017 "1. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,88,27,050/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any/all g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....awla 21 taxman.com 412 passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, but the facts of the present assessee's case were not elaborated by the Ld. DR. Therefore we are deciding the case from the observations made by the Assessing Officer as Ld. DR's submissions. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that in similar circumstances the relatives of the assessee as being assessed on similar basis which was decided by the Tribunal in the case of Sameer Gupta who is a son of assessee. The Ld.AR submitted that the Hon'ble High Court also confirmed the decision of the Tribunal. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. The tribunal in case of Son of the assessee herein held as under :- "24. We have consid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 412 (234 taxman 300). Finding of the CIT(A) on this issue has already been reproduced in the presiding paragraphs. So far as the reliance by the Ld. DR in the case of Smt. Dayawanti vs. CIT (supra) is concerned, we find the facts of that case are completely different from that of the facts of the present case. In that case the son of the assessee had categorically admitted that there were unaccounted purchase and sale of various items in Supari from different parties. He had also admitted that certain purchases are unaccounted and accordingly he had surrendered certain income. However, in the present case there is no unaccounted transaction found during the course of search. The capital gain that arose from the sale of shares are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de In absence of any incriminating material and since in the instant case, there is no evidence whatsoever on record that any incriminating material was found during the course of search and since the addition was made on the basis of certain inquiries conducted subsequent to the search on the basis of return already filed, therefore, on this issue itself addition has to be deleted. We, therefore, uphold the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss the ground raised by the revenue." The Hon'ble High Court in the said case held as under :- "In this case the search took place in the premises on 03.10.2013. A notice under Section 153A was issued to the assessee which re-affirmed its earlier returns. The Assessing Officer completed the Secti....