TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 55
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming addition of Rs. 16,80,531/- as unexplained income relating to deposits in the account with ICICI Bank. (ii) That the finding and conclusion of the authorities below is without proper appreciation of facts and opportunity to the assessee. 2(i) That CIT(A) has also erred in confirming addition of Rs. 43,74,830//'as income from undisclosed sources. (ii) That whole basis of addition is illegal, arbitrary and without proper appreciation of facts. 3(i). That CIT(A) has also erred in making enhancement to the extent of Rs. 69,52,368/- on the basis of application of provisions of sec. 40a(ia)/40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (ii) T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Bank and further addition of Rs. 43,74,830/- was made on account of undisclosed sources of the income. The addition of Rs. 43,74,830/- was made for the reason that according to Assessing Officer the assessee has made an investment of Rs. 66,57,017/- and has only earned income of Rs .6,01,650/-. Therefore, assessee has not shown income of Rs. 60,55,367/- out of which an addition of Rs. 16,80,537/- is already made on account of cash deposit in ICICI Bank. Therefore, the balance addition of Rs. 43,74,830/- was made. 05 Assessee aggrieved with the order preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT (Appeals) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee as per order dated 25.09.2014 confirming both the additions. The ld. CIT (Appeals) further stated th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has made the announcement to the total income of the assessee without issuing any notice u/s 251 (2) of the act. He otherwise submitted that when the assessee has been assessed on the best image business by finding out the difference between the amount of investment made with the amount of source available with the assessee for making such investment, the disallowance cannot be made for non-deduction of tax or for provisions of Section 40 A (3) of the act. 07 The learned departmental representative vehemently supported the orders of the learned lower authorities. He submitted that for the purpose of making the enhancement the learned CIT - A has held the hearing 24 times and therefore it cannot be stated that the assessee has not been g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e books of accounts. Further for the assessment year 2009 - 10 it was submitted that assessee has five bank accounts, AO noted that all of them are old bank accounts and therefore he held that assessee is not maintaining the true books of accounts and also not showing true income. Therefore he rejected the books of accounts and proceeded to make the assessment as per information available on record. Thereafter the learned assessing officer proceeded to list out the assets available with the assessee. He found that assessee has made an investment of Rs. 6,657,017/- during the year and assessee has shown only the income of Rs. 601,650, therefore the assessee has not shown the source of investment in the assets acquired of Rs. 6,055,367/-. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the revenue. He stated that assessee was having the net wealth of cash in hand of Rs. 5,598,734 and the commercial vehicles of Rs. 1,473,088/- as on that date. This amount has been accepted by the revenue in the wealth tax act and consequential penalty proceedings Under the well tax act have also been initiated u/s 18 (1) (C) of the act. He therefore the contention of the learned authorised representative is that assessee must be granted the credit of the opening cash in hand available with him as on 31st of March 2008 of Rs. 55,98,734. On careful perusal of the assessment order passed Under the wealth tax act by the income tax officer Ward 54 (2), New Delhi for assessment year 2008 - 09 the argument of the learned authorised representat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st such enhancement. Therefore, the learned CIT - A must first issue a notice to the assessee proposing the reasons and the amount of enhancement of the income of the assessee. In the present case the learned CIT - A has enhanced the income of the assessee without issuing any show cause notice. Therefore it is clearly in violation of the provisions of Section 251 (2) of the income tax act and therefore it cannot be sustained. Even otherwise the learned CIT - A has provided 24 opportunities to the assessee to hear him on the merits of the addition made by the learned assessing officer. However, for the purpose of making enhancement he did not issue a single notice as provided u/s 251 (2) of the act which clearly shows that enhancement cannot....