TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 234
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n facts & circumstances the ld. CIT appeal has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 45,00,000/- made by assessing officer u/s 69B behind the back of appellant. 2. Whether in law and on facts & circumstances the ld. CIT appeal has erred in not providing opportunity to appellant to argue before ld. CIT Appeal. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, or alter any of the ground or grounds of appeal either before or at the time of appeal." 4. The case was fixed for hearing after issuing notice to both the parties. On behalf of the assessee no one appeared and the matter is taken up based on the facts available on record and considering the arguments placed on record by the learned departmental representative. 5. The fact as culled out from the records that the assessee has filed its return of income electronically on 23/03/2014 declaring income at Rs. 9,87,670/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. The notices were issued to the assessee u/s 143(2) and 142(1) along with the questionnaire from time to time. The books of accounts were also produced. The assessee derives income by way of interest and remuneration from various firms viz. M/s Yug ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....able to the transactions of the assessee as the assessee has acquired the asset for valuable consideration and till 01.04.2014. The Act did not provided that if the consideration paid is less than Stamp Duty Valuation the same is treated as income of the assessee. 5.3 In respect of these two properties the Assessing Officer has issued summons u/s 131(1) of the Act, 1961 asking Sh. Mukesh Tiwari and Shri Nardha the seller of the property. 5.4 Out of two seller one of the seller of the property to the assessee Sh. Nardha expired on 03.05.2015. Thus, wife of late Sh. Nardha, Smt. Chutki Bai and Sh. Jaswant Kumar Sonant, son of the Late Shri Nardha were summoned by the Assessing Officer both legal heir appeared on 10.02.2016 and has given their statements. In their statements aforesaid witness accepted that her husband Late Sh. Nardha has sold a piece of land to the assessee for a consideration of Rs. 50,00,000/- which has been received in cash from the assessee. She further accepted that since the amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- is heavy amount. It has been obtained in 3 to 4 installments due to safety reasons and she was accompanied to her husband along with her son. She also stated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee on the basis of their statement to explain why the amount as per their statement to income of the assessee, Your assessee submits as under: 1. Please appreciate that the assessee has never entered into any agreement with so called Smt. Chtki Bai and Jaswant Kumar Sonat. The assessee has never met them and never had any transaction of cash dealing with Nardha in their presence. 2. The assessee purchased a piece of land from Nardha for a consideration of Rs. 5,35,000/- which was paid as single payment on date of registration of sale deed by seller Nardha. 3. Please note statement of Smt. Chutki Bai and Jaswant Kumar Sonat is not factual and correct and therefore cannot be used against the assessee. 4. With regard to transaction with Nardha your office should only rely upon registered document of sales consideration paid by your assessee, kindly note that sale deed clearly mentions the consideration paid by your assessee. There is no material with you on the basis of which you can held that the assessee paid any sum over and over the consideration mentioned in the sale deed. Please also note that the seller Nardha has already passed up a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee. 9. Your assessee is hopeful that in the interest of justice you will not draw any adverse presumption and no addition will be made by your office on hearsay and without any material against the assessee." 7. As regards, the cross examination of Sh. Dile Suryavanshi as claimed by the assessee, it is found to be unnecessary as the primary witnesses and also the immediate successors of Late Shri Nardha have given their statement for which assessee has not claimed any cross examination and the plea of the assessee appears to be a delaying tactic and nothing else and far from being practical. Therefore, the claim of the assessee is not accepted and on the basis of statements given by Smt. Chutki Bai and Shri Jaswant Kumar Sonanat added a sum of Rs. 45,00,000/- u/s 69B of the Act. 8. Aggrieved from the order of the ld. AO the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who has categorically given his finding that the statement recorded by the AO was confronted by the AO to the assessee and it was incumbent upon the assessee to request the AO to call the witness for cross examination which he did not do so. The exact finding of the ld. CIT(A) in this regards....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cash in 3 to 4 instalments. The contention of the assessee that there was no transaction between Chutki Bai and her son Shri Jashwant Kumar Sanant age 30 years, the assessee is sadly mistaken that he was denied to have transaction with one of the coparcener and legally having right of ownership of the land. The affidavits furnished by Dak by the assessee are nothing but and after thought to undo the statement recorded under oath by the quasi judicial authority. In fact the AO has recorded the statement of the two persons who had inherent right in the property which the assessee claims to have purchase only from the deceased Nardha. It is a fact that a deceased person cannot attend the court and court has to consider the legal heir of the deceased but in this case it is not only legal heirs whose statements had been recorded by the AO but also they are having interest in the land in the eyes of law having right to maintenance and also in capacity of coparcener. Thus, after going through the facts narrated by the AO and submission made by the assessee and the AR through Dak, I do not find any force in the submission of the ARs. The finding given by the AO is hereby ....