2023 (3) TMI 1518

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....general in nature. The remaining effective ground nos. 5, 6 & 7 read as follows: - 5. "That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in holding that it was the burden of the appellant to establish that no amount of capitation fees has been paid to M/s Santosh Medical College. 6. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the addition of Rs. 32,50,000/- on account of alleged payment to M/s Santosh Medical College without providing any opportunity of cross examination and relying upon the information collected behind the back of the appellant. 7. That the impugned assessment order is arbitrary, illegal, bad in law and the violation of rudimentary principle of contemporary jurisprudence. " 3. The Ld. Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee. 4. Replying to the above, the Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the addition made by the AO and uphold by the Ld. CIT (A) is sustainable as the assessee failed to substantial source of cash given to M/s Santosh Medical College as capitation fees. 5. On careful consideration of rival submissions, first of all I may point out that under identical facts and circumstances, a coordinate bench ITAT, Delhi in the case of Shri Naresh Pamnani Vs. ITO (supra), which has been referred by the coordinate bench of Delhi Tribunal in the subsequent order in the case of Shri Manjit Singh Gahlot Vs. ITO (supra), the Tribunal held as follows: - "5. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessee. I rely upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Chand Chellaram 125 ITR 713 (SC). In the present case, the A.O. has relied upon the statement of Dr P Mahalingam, recorded during the course of search, under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act against the assessee, in which he has admitted to have received capitation fees from the assessee of Rs. 19,75,000/- in cash. The assessing officer recorded statement of assessee at assessment stage, in which, the statement of Dr P Mahalingam recorded under section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, have been referred to, but, it is nowhere mentioned in which statement, if such copy of the statement was provided to assessee for explanation of assessee. The asses....