2020 (2) TMI 561

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y and without jurisdiction as the Ld. CIT did not set aside the original assessment order and in rejecting the addition ground on this issue. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts as well as in law in rejecting the admission of additional evidences u/r. 46A. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts as well as in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 34,65,096/- u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts as well as in law in confirming the addition on the basis of the AO's submissions and without considering the submissions filed by the appellant. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred on facts as well as in law in confirming the addition on the ground that notices issued....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....us discrepancies in the assessment order of the AO, as mentioned at page no. 2-3 of the assessment order. In order to give effect to the order of the Ld. CIT, Delhi XVI, New Delhi, notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act alongwith a letter dated 22.11.2012 was sent to the assessee to submit his explanation alongwith documents/vouchers in support of his submission on 3.12.2012. In response to the same, AR of the assessee filed Cash Flow Statement from 1.4.04 to 31.3.05. He was again asked to furnish necessary documents and explain the source of deposit of Rs. 46,00,892/- which was further invested in properties and in response to the same the AR of the assessee filed the copy of Khatonis (3 pages) and confirmation letters from 06 persons mentioned at ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....upporting the claim of the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assesee stated that keeping in view of the documentary evidences filed before the revenue authorities, assessee has discharged the onus as required u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Assessee has also explained the creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction of Rs. 34,65,096/- and requested to delete the addition in dispute. 4. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities and stated that the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue in dispute and confirmed the addition, after appreciating the evidences produced by the assessee and therefore, he requested that the appeal filed by the assessee may be dismissed. 5. I have heard both the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d, Agricultural landownership documents etc. of Sh. Bhagirath; confirmation from PAN card, Voter ID card, Agricultural landownership documents etc of Sh. Dularam; confirmation from PAN card, Voter ID card, Agricultural landownership documents etc of Sh. Bhagwana Ram; Application u/r 46A dated 1.7.2016; written submissions for filing additional ground dt. 29.2.2016; written submission dated 1.7.2016 filed before Ld. CIT(A); written submissions dated 28.9.2016 filed before Ld. CIT(A); order u/s. 263; adjournment letter filed before CIT(A) and Power of attorney filed before CIT(A). I have perused the documentary evidences filed by the assessee and find that assessee filed the affidavit of Smt. Smt. Saroj Sharma; Affidavit of Smt. Raghuveer Sha....