TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1334
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dated 17.0502021 passed u/s 144/153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') by the JCIT (OSD), Central Circle-26, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). 2. Heard and perused the records. The facts in brief are that on 07.03.2017, the Police at Shahjahanpur, U.P. intercepted a bus and seized cash of Rs. 68,47,000/- from two individuals, Mujahid and Shadab. They stated that the said cash belonged to Aabid Ali Khan. The matter was referred to the Income Tax Department, Central Circle-26, New Delhi. The Appellant explained that he had collected a total sum of Rs. 80,42,100/- from 17 individuals, most of whom were close family members, including the Appellant's son, brother, mother-in-law, son's mo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l raising following grounds:- "1. The assessment is Bad in Law and Void Ab- initio. 2. The Assessment proceedings via E-notice u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued and uploaded on 15/04/2021, for filing the Return of Income for the AY 2017-18 within 15 days from the service of notice. However, a corrigendum was issued on 19/04/2021 within 7 days from the service of the notice. Further, on 22/04/2021, a notice u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 along with detailed questionnaire was issued for which response has to be filed by 24/04/2021. The A.O. ultimately passed the order u/s 144/153 A read with section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 17/05/2021 during the period of Severe Pandemic. 3. The As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n-law, son's mother-in-law, son's brother-in-law, as well as friends, for the specific purpose of purchasing a property in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. Since the proposed property deal could not materialize, the collected funds were being transported back to Delhi. The Appellant' AR emphasized that the entire collection was made with the express intention of acquiring the property, and that the contributions were legitimate, documented, and from known associates and family members, thereby explaining the source and purpose of the amount in question. The Appellant's AR submitted details of the investment/contribution of each person, duly signed and notarised affidavit along with their bank statement available at PB 17 to 129. It was submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... record. He contended that it is a settled law, as laid down in Commissioner Of Income Tax Orissa vs. Orissa Corporation Pvt Ltd. (159 ITR 78, SC), that once the Appellant provides prima facie evidence regarding the identity and source, the burden shifts to the Department to verify, Likewise, the affidavits filed could not have been brushed aside without crossexamination, in view of the ratio in Mehta Parikh & Co. vs. CIT (30 ITR 181, SC). 3.2 Further, the addition of Rs. 11,95,100/- over and above the amount actually seized by the Police is arbitrary and beyond jurisdiction. Most importantly, the entire conclusion of the AO rests on suspicion and conjecture rather than evidence, which is impermissible in law as held in Umacharan Shaw & ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to buy land and as the deal did not went through the amount was being taken back. 6. During the hearing of this appeal, we asked the ld. AR if the criminal case has culminated and the order dated 24.07.2017 of the Criminal Court had been filed which shows that out of four persons apprehended as suspects, two of them Mujahid, S/o Salim and Shadab, S/o Eitsham were found to be innocent and no charge sheet against them was filed. In regard to two other persons apprehended, namely Taufeek and Deepu Goswami, there is nothing on record to show that after facing trial they have been acquitted. The ld. Counsel has also placed on record a copy of the order dated 02.02.2018 of the said Criminal Court whereby the Investigating Officer had sought d....