TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 1227
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: "1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the appeal order passed by ld.CIT(A) (NFAC) dismissing the appeal of the appellant is wrong and erroneous because order has been passed in the case of the appellant on facts and grounds of some other case and not on facts and grounds of the appellant's case. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of case as well as in law, Ld.CIT(A)(NFAC) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant and thereby sustaining the validity of the proceedings u/s 147/148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (the Act) and consequent assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act in the case of the appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccount of the appellant as unexplained, though the appellant has explained all the deposits/credits with documentary evidences and ld.AO has not mentioned any basis for making this addition and for arriving at the amount of addition. 6. That the ld. AO has erred in charging interest u/s 234B of the Act in respect of above wrong and unjustified additions and ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of appellant. 7. Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify any ground of appeal." 3. At the outset, Learned Authorized Representative (Ld. AR) of the assessee informs the Bench that assessee does not wish to press ground no.2; therefore, we dismiss the ground no.2 as not pressed. 4. The facts of the case i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from other sources". Therefore, the difference between Rs. 35,77,618/- and Rs. 15,50,000/- i.e. Rs. 20,27,618/- was treated as income from other sources. Since two shops were there, the impugned addition was proposed at Rs. 40,55,236/-. In response to the show-cause notice on the impugned issue, the assessee filed reply on 26.10.2018. The assessee stated that the properties were purchased by paying booking money in February, 2011 and therefore valuation of the property in February, 2011 has been adopted. The assessee further stated that stamp duty value adopted is very high and requested for reference of the said property to DVO to determine fair market value. The Assessing Officer acceded to the request of the assessee and referred the ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the facts mentioned in the appellate order that the appeal decided by the Ld. CIT(A) pertains to the assessment order of ITO, Ward-2, Vapi for AY.2016-17; however, the impugned assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act by the ITO, Ward-1(3)(1), Surat for AY.2014-15. Moreover, the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeal against a partnership firm who had filed return of income for the AY.2016-17 on 23.07.2016, declaring total income of Rs. 4,57,260/-. However, in case of the appellant, the original return for AY.2014-15 was filed on 30.07.2014, declaring total income of Rs. 8,61,350/-. Further, the total assessed income in case of assessee is Rs. 62,65,659/- whereas in case of the appeal decided by the assessee, assessed i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee. The Ld. CIT(A) should consider all the materials which have been furnished before him and he may also call for additional information and explanation from the assessee as deemed fit. The assessee is also directed furnish all the details submitted before the Tribunal and as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(A). 8. The Ld. AR has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Bank vs. K. S. Govindan Nari and others, in Civil Appeal No. 7555 of 2004, dated 19.11.2004 / (2004) 13 SCC 697 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that "the division bench should have decided the matter on the basis of material available on record, therefore there was no question of remand when the evidence was already on ....