TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1406
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t order dated 31-12- 2019 under section 153A of the Income Tax Act (in short "the Act") pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15. 2. The appeal is time barred by 56 days. An application with affidavit filed by the assessee to condone the delay. In the application the assessee stated that the appeal was dismissed ex-parte. Unfortunately, the assessee passed away on 15-09- 2022 due to heart attack during the pendency of appeal. No effective communication was received to the legal heirs of the assessee. Sufficient reason has been shown to condone the delay by the assessee. Therefore, we condone the 56 days delay in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised the following grounds in appeal: 1. On the facts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he action of the AO despite the fact that the assessment order passed under section 153A is illegal and liable to be quashed as the same was passed in violation of circular no. 19/2019 issued by CBDT which mandates that no order shall be passed without there being valid Document Identification Number (DIN) quoted in the body of the order. 7(i) On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 21,80,000/- made by the AO alleging that assessee has made payment in cash towards purchase of property under section 69B of the Income Tax Act. (ii) That the above said addition has been confirming ignoring the submission made by the assessee before the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Patel Nagar, New Delhi. Assessment jurisdiction over the assessee was transferred from Central Circle -15 Delhi to the Central Circle -27 by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2. Notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee to furnish the return of income for the year under consideration. In the response of the notice the assessee filed return of income on 22-11-2019 declaring income of Rs. 8,92,310/-.Notices u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire and u/s143(2) of the Act were issued to the assessee. The Assessing officer completed the assessment after considering the submission submitted by the assessee and made the addition of Rs. 21,80,000/- u/s 69B of the Act on account of unexplained investment. 4. Aggrieved the or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT (Central vs. Kabul Chawala 380 ITR 573 in which the Hon'ble court held that assessment completed under section 153A only if some incriminating material unearthed during the search. Reliance also placed on the following decisions: (i) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -3v. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. 2023 (4) TMI1056 Supreme Court (ii) Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax central -2 v, S.S. Con Buil Pvt. Ltd. 2023(8) TMI 685 SC (iii)Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central -1 v. Saroj Sudhir Kothari 2023(8) TMI 686 SC (iv) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 20 v. U.K. Paints (overseas) Ltd. 2023(5) TMI 373 SC (v) Principa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the modus operandi as to how the cash is provided to accommodation entry operator in lieu of allotment of shares of a private company. Thereafter when the matter was carried up in appeal before the CIT(A), the findings of AO were affirmed. However, in further appeal before the ITAT, the said findings were set aside vide the impugned order. 4. The Revenue is aggrieved with the aforesaid impugned order and has filed the present appeal under section 260A of the Act, proposing the following questions of law: a. Whether the ITAT if justified in deleting the additions made on account of bogus long term capital gain on the ground that the evidences found during search at the premises of entry provider cannot br the basis for ....