TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 1557
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent year 2011-12 on the grounds inter alia that :- "1) The Ld. CIT (A) erred in not considering the fact that the impugned notice u/s. 148 was illegal since the reasons recorded before issuing the same were baseless, and as such, the reassessment proceedings in pursuance thereof is vitiated. 2) The Ld. CIT (A] also failed to consider that the impugned order is passed mechanically by the Ld. Assessing Officer without affording an opportunity to the appellant to defend her case, and as such, the same is liable to be annulled on account of non application of mind and violation of principles of natural justice. 3) The Ld. CIT (A) also failed to consider that the appellant was never given any opportunity to cross-exami....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ceeded to make addition of Rs.10,52,400/- to the total income of the assessee and thereby framed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). 4. Assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing appeal who has confirmed the addition by dismissing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing present appeal. 5. At the very outset, it is brought to the notice of the Bench that there is a delay of 3 years in filing the appeal for which the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay on the ground that the impugned order has never been served upon by the assessee through post or through mail but she....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... addition in this case has been made on the basis of evidence collected during the search operation at the premises of Cosmos Group and its group company. 8. We have perused the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in group case arising out of same search conducted at the Cosmos Group where on money of Rs.8 lakhs against the purchase of flat in building Horizon/Twilight, developed by Cosmos Group was paid as in the instant case which was decided in favour of the assessee by returning following findings: "3. Brief facts of the case are that information was received from the Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv), Unit 1(4), Mumbai that assessee along with her husband, had paid on-money of Rs 8,00,000/-, against purchas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "Where any books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search, it may be presumed- (i) That such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing belong or belongs to such person; (ii) That the contents of such books of account and other documents are true; and (iii) That the signature and every other part of such books of account and other documents which purport to be in the handwriting of any particular person or which may reasonably bye assumed to have been signed by, or to be in the handwriting of, any particular person, are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT vs P.V Kalyanasundasram 164 Taxman 78 (SC). Moreover there is nothing on record to suggest that so called electronic evidence collected by revenue at the builder's office is compliant with the requirement of section 65B of Evidence Act regarding admissibility of electronic evidence. Hence, I set aside the orders of the authority below and direct that the addition be deleted. 7. In the result, appeal is allowed." 9. Since the sole issue raised in this appeal is covered by the order (supra) passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal addition made in this case is not sustainable. Because the addition is made merely on the basis of statement made by one Mr. Suraj Parmar, on....