TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 913
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....013-14 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the 'Act') vide orders of even date 31.12.2018. 2. These appeals by the assessee are time barred by 50 days and assessee has filed affidavit for condonation petition. The facts are that the orders of CIT(A) dated 12.08.2022 was received by assessee on 20.08.2022 and appeal should have been filed before the Tribunal on or before 19.10.2022 but actually appeal was filed before Tribunal only on 08.12.2022 thereby there is a delay of 50 days. The assessee stated the reason that he was pursuing alternative remedies of filing rectification petition and the reason reads as under:-. 2 The order of CIT(A) dtd,, 12.08.2022 was received on 20.08,2022. Rectification petit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the AO made addition on this count at Rs.11,64,250/-. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). 4.1 The CIT(A) deleted the addition in regard to salary given by company to the assessee for an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- by observing in para 7.3 as under "7.3 I have carefully considered the matter. Regarding addition of Rs.11,00,000/-it is seen that Smt. Sabira and assessee were having credit balances of Rs.10,00,000/- and Rs.1,00,000/- in the account of Airtech Machine and tools as on 31.03.2011. Those credit no longer appear in the account as on 31.03.2012. Smt. Sabeera had confirmed that her money of Rs.10,00,000/- was returned by the company through the account of her son-in-law. The AO simply brushed aside the documen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. After hearing ld.counsel and going through the case records, I noticed that this income has been explained by assessee and even otherwise it is not clear from the assessment order that how the AO is making addition of this Rs.64,000/- because the salary income narrated by AO in his order is only Rs.11,00,000/- which is deleted by CIT(A) because the assessee has already declared this amount under the head salary. Hence, I delete the addition and allow this issue of assessee's appeal. 6. Coming to second issue against the order of CIT(A) upholding the addition made by AO of Rs.2,43,170/-. 7. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee has tried to explain the purchase of the following properties:- i. Vacant site on 16.12.2011....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n appeal before the Tribunal. 8. I have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. I noted that even from the fund position as noted by the AO there is withdrawal from father's bank account maintained at SBI, Vadavalli, an amount of Rs.2,40,000/- and withdrawal of Rs.7,00,000/- on 05.03.2012, total comes to Rs.9,40,000/- whereas investment is only Rs.9,39,320/-. It means that the investment and withdrawal matches. In term of the above, I allow this issue in favour of assessee and I direct the AO to delete the addition. 9. The next issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) upholding the addition made by AO of Rs.7,35,000/-. 10. Brief facts are that the AO made addition o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the assessee is party-allowed. ITA No.1067/CHNY/2022 13. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) upholding the addition of Rs.59,000/- deposited by one Mrs.Shakila Muralibalan. 14. I have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. Brief facts are that the AO during the course of assessment proceedings noticed that the assessee has made cash deposit in his bank account amounting to Rs.15,49,000/- which was unexplained. Hence, he made addition. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) restricted the addition at Rs.59,000/- claimed to have been received by assessee from Mrs. Shakila Muralibalan. The assessee filed confirmation from the de....