AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1121
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and in law , the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the Assessment Order dated 19.03.2015 passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 143(3)/144 of the Act. 3. Under the facts & circumstances of the case and in law , the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the action of the Ld. AO in confirming addition to the extent of Rs 2,07,82,092/- in respect of the following: a) Rs 30,56,050/- in respect of alleged cash payment to Shri Suresh Dangi for purchase of property. b) Rs 1,57,51,042/- in respect of property purchased in joint ownership with Shri Ahmed Noor, and c) Rs. 19,75,000/- by disallowing the losses on agreements in disputes. 4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in passing order without granting adequate opportunity of being heard, therefore, the appellant prays to tile additional evidences in the interest of natural justice. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the levy of interest u/s interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C. 6. That Appellant reserves his right to add or amend and modify any grounds of appeal." ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 68,316/- 93,00,480/- The ld. AO completed assessment u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) on 19.03.2015 with following addition: S. No Particulars Detail Amount (in Rs) 1 Total Income as per Return filed 93,00,480/- 2 Disallowance on account on non-production of evidences u/s 80C 68,316/- 3 Addition on account of retraction of Income offered during search operation 2,44,95,1067- Total Addition 2,45,63,422 Total Income 3,38,63,902/- While making aforesaid addition ld. AO heavily relied on the facts that assessee has not maintained books of account till search period and he prepared books only after search operation, hence cash balance on basis of such cash flow and memorandum cash book cannot be relied. Further assessee himself admitted that he invested these amounts from his out of book income during search operation, statement recorded was with free consent, hence the asssessee cannot be allowed to travel back from his own admission and with these reason only he summarily rejected explanations and books and other ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....50,56,050/-. The assessee paid the cash Rs. 30,56,050/- on dated 20.11.2012 and rest amount Rs. 20 lacs would be for 4 postdated cheques. Due to the search the cheques were not honoured and assessee was unable to paid the balance amount. The seller Mr. Suresh Dangi executed the sale by the registered deed in the name of Sh. Jhujhar Bhai and the agreement with assessee was cancelled. Copy of the agreement was placed before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) had rejected the same. It is very clear that agreement of sale is not a final instrument for transfer of property and any time this agreement can be terminated as per the terms and conditions. 4.1 In explanation of addition Rs. 1,51,51,042/-, the assessee placed that the assessee purchased the land at Dabok jointly with Mr. Ahmed Noor. Out of total amount paid a sum of Rs. 1,84,39,868/- and Mr. Ahmed Noor paid Rs. 1,57,51,042/-. At the time of search, the assessee surrendered a sum of Rs. 2,79,81,292/- on this account. But at the time of filing of return u/s 153A, the assessee rectified and retracted from the surrendered amount and declared amount of Rs. 1,22,30,250/- and the rest amount Rs. 1,57,51,042/- was duly paid by Mr. Ahme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment proceedings u/s. 153A the income was shown at Rs. 1,22.30 250/- only and claimed that Rs. 1,57,51,042/- was paid by Shri Ahmed Noor through cheque or cash. In my view, the source of payment of Rs. 1.57,51,042/- as explained by the appellant as having been paid by Shri Ahmed Noor is not acceptable. First of all, there is no evidence to prove that Shri Ahmed Noor is the joint owner of the property purchased. No confirmation of any kind regarding co- ownership and the source of payment alleged to have been paid by the said person is available. Even the bank account of Shri Ahmed Noor practically operated by the appellant. Shri Ahmed Noor is stated tc be residing abroad. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case the explanation offered by the appellant the amount of Rs. 1,57,51,042/- cannot be accepted. Addition to this extent is confirmed." Ground No. 3 (c) 6. During search, the assessee declared Rs. 28,61,454/- related to details expenditure, the assessee claimed expenses Rs. 19.75,000/- on account of disputed agreement cancellation which is in dispute. The ld. AR claimed that the assessee earned surrendered amount Rs. 1,22,30,250/- as his gros....