TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1385
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unverified loose papers, reflects borrowed satisfaction and absence of a legally sustainable "reason to believe," and is therefore liable to be quashed as void ab initio. Ground 2-Violation of natural justice That the learned Assessing Officer erred in law and on facts in completing the reassessment without properly considering and adjudicating the detailed objections and evidences filed by the appellant during the assessment proceedings. Despite specific denial of alleged cash payment, furnishing of documentary evidence, and request for cross-examination, the learned AO failed to deal with the submissions in a reasoned manner, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and rendering the impugned order unsustainable in law. Ground 3-Addition based on uncorroborated material without Independent examination That the addition of Rs.30,00,000 is unsustainable as it is based solely on uncorroborated third-party loose papers, without any independent evidence establishing actual payment by the appellant. The learned Assessing Officer has neither examined the concerned builder nor brought any supporting cash trail or primary ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me of Roshini Enterprises, Ganadhish GNP and GNP Infracon. During search action certain incriminating document was found and seized which disclosed details of on-money collected by GNP group. On the basis of information, the AO was of the view that assessee has made payment of Rs. 30.00 lacs as on-money for purchase of immovable property. To verify such source of cash deposit and time deposit, the case of assessee was reopened. The AO before issuing notice under section 148, issued under section148 (A)(b) and after getting reply from assessee passed order under section 148A(d) dated 30.03.2023. Thereafter, the AO issued notice under section 148 dated 30.03.2023. During the assessment, the AO issued show cause notice for seeking details of investment by assessee. The assessee in response to show cause notice submitted that assessee has purchased industrial unit for a sum of Rs. 27.00 lacs on 28.08.2020. The assessee furnished complete details of payment made against sale consideration of Rs. 27.00 lacs. The assessee also stated that in addition to Rs. 27.00 lacs. He has paid a development charge of Rs. 1,10,000/- and Rs. 79,721/- on account of two years' society maintenance in advan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p. The AO alleged that assessee made cash payment / on-money of Rs. 30.00 lacs in F.Y. 2018-19 for purchase of unit no. 7 GNP Galaxy, Ambernath and treated such amount as unexplained investment. The assessee never made any cash payment for purchase of such property. The assessee executed registered agreement on 28.08.2020, much after year under consideration. The assessee made payment of Rs. 27.00 lacs through banking channel. Registered agreement with builder, builder receipt and bank statement clearly prove the payment of sale consideration. The assessee also filed his affidavit explaining the fact that entire sale consideration was made through bank mode payment. Once the assessee discharged his burden, the onus shifts on the revenue to produce credible evidence. No evidence of any primary nature was brought on record. There is no confirmation, no cash receipt, no bank withdrawal or no statement of builder supporting such allegation is brought on record. The seized document may be against "Anup Tejwani". No seized material was provided to the assessee; no investigation was conducted by AO about payment of on-money. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in a non-speaking order desp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ash Bhaguji Katkade vs ITO in ITO No. 7402/M/2025, deleted similar addition which was made on the basis of search on Cosmos Group. Further, similar addition were deleted in case of Bharat Laxman Bhiwapurkar vs ITO ITA No. 3413/M/2023 dated 04.03.2024, and in Anand Gupta Vs. ITO, Ward 1(2) vide ITA No.5561/Mum/2018, 8. In Prakash Bhaguji Katkade vs ITO (supra) the coordinate bench of Tribunal on similar set of facts deleted similar addition on merit, the relevant part of the order is extracted below; "5. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The assessee is an individual deriving income from salary. The assessing officer received information from the investigation wing in respect of search action taken place in the case of Cosmos Group engaged in the business of building and construction and the information relating to on money payment received. The assessing officer stated that for purchasing flat no. A/07 at Harizon Twilte, the assessee had made cash payment of Rs. 31,00,000/- over and above the agreement value of the flat. After referring material placed on record the assessee submitted that AO has merely relied upon the statement recorded u/s 132(4....