TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1640
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3), determining the income of assessee at Rs. 28,57,035/-. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the assessment order, passed without assuming jurisdiction as per law and in violation of mandatory conditions of section 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and judicial precedents on the issue of notice u/s 148. 3. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the documentary evidences produced by the assessee while sustaining the addition u/s 69 of the Act. 4. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 28,26,875/-without appreciating that the assessment has been made in a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee could not explain the source of remaining cash deposit in her bank account. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since sustained the said findings of the AO. Against the said findings and the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that AO initiated the assessment proceedings basis AIR information that Rs. 30,00,000/- was deposited in the bank account of the assessee. It was submitted that it is a settled legal position that reasons to believe must be based on independent application of mind demonstrating the link between the material available with the AO and the formation of belief that incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e limits for a consideration of Rs. 1,33,54,000/- in cash @ 22,95,000/- per acre vide notarised agreement to sell dt. 10/02/2011 followed by sale deed no. 78 dt. 03/05/2011. It was submitted that as against the consideration mentioned in the agreement to sell, the sale deed was registered at the consideration of Rs. 40,73,125/- which was at sole discretion of the buyer of the land and her husband had no control over the same. It was submitted that out of the aforesaid sale consideration of Rs. 1,33,54,000/- received by the husband of the assessee Rs. 39,00,000/- was deposited by him in the bank account of the assessee by way of gift. 7. It was submitted that funds so received by the husband of the assessee were deposited in her bank acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee by directing the deletion of addition so made and sustained by the ld CIT(A). 8. In her submissions, the ld DR submitted that the AO had tangible material in his possession in the form of information that cash of Rs 30 lacs has been deposited in the bank account of the assessee and basis the same, he has recorded the reasons that the income has escaped assessment. It was submitted that the ld AR has not disputed the quantum of cash so deposited and the bank account in the name of the assessee where the cash was found deposited. It was accordingly submitted that there is clearly a nexus between the material and formation of belief that the income has escaped assessment and the contentions so raised by the ld AR cannot be accepted. 9....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t to tax remaining sum of Rs. 28,26,875/- as unexplained income under Section 69 of the Act in the hands of the assessee. 11. If we look at the provisions of Section 69, it talks about the assessee having made investments which are not recorded in the books of account, if any maintained by her for any source of income and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of such investment. In the instant case, what has been found were cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee and as such, no investment has been found by the AO, therefore, the question of invocation of provisions of section 69 doesn't arise in the instant case. 12. Even if we were to ignore the fact that the AO has wrongly invoked section 69 and s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e husband of the assessee and on this count as well, the addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee. 13. Notwithstanding the invocation of specific deeming provisions, the factum of gift of money from the donor (assessee husband) to the donee (assessee) has not been disputed by the AO which is duly supported by both written and oral evidence in form of gift deed and confirmation by the donor who physically appeared before the AO and confirmed the making of gift of money to donee. The gift of money has flown in the bank account of the assessee by way of deposit by husband of the assessee in two tranches - Rs 30 lacs on 03/05/2011 and Rs 9 lacs on 09/05/2011 and in such circumstances, we are unable to sustain the findings of the ....