2026 (7) TMI 124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt Year (A.Y.) 2004-05 in the proceeding u/s 144 r.w.s 263 of the Income Tax Act [hereinafter referred as "The Act"]. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed his return of income for A.Y. 2004-05 o 27.09.2005 declaring total income of Rs. 1,11,430/-. A search was conducted by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Ahmedabad, in the case of the assessee on 28.03.2005. On the basis of intimation received from (ACB), proceeding u/s. 147 of the Act was initiated and the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 22.12.2006 determining income at Rs. 2,36,430/-; wherein an addition of Rs. 1,25,000/- was made on account of unaccounted investment made in assessee's own names and also in the name of his family....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....him The order passed in violation of principles of natural justice deserves to be cancelled. It be so held now. 2. Without prejudice to the above ground, the Ld.ADDL/JCIT(Appeals)-4 Mumbai also erred in law and on facts in confirming the additions of Rs. 1,25,000/- for which the evidences were already furnished at lower levels as submitted before him vide various letters with Annexures. The Sources of investment and expenses were duly explained and hence the additions made deeming the amount of Rs. 1,25,000/- as the appellants income is patently wrong and contrary to facts. It be so held now and addition of Rs. 1,25,000/- be deleted now. 3. The Ld ADDL/JCIT(Appeals) further erred both in law and on facts in not appreciatin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appellants case and considering the grounds against affording inadequate opportunity of hearing by the Ld AO and also, considering the documentary evidences, the appeal of the appellant ought to have been allowed in toto and directed the Ld AO to accept the returned income of Rs. 1,1,430/ It be so held now. 7 The Id ADDLJCIT(Appeals)-4 Mumabi Ought to have held that the orders passed making additions of Rs. 1,25,000/- for the year under appeal were illegal, invalid and bad in law. It be so held now. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or delete any of the grounds at the time of hearing. 5. Shri Divyakant Parikh, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Tribunal vide order dated 08.12.2016 had set as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the investments in the name of the family members of the accused are in fact, investments made by the accused appears to be baseless, lacking corroborative evidence either oral or documentary and it is made only on the basis of conjecture and surmises and not backed by legal evidence, hence cannot be accepted." 8. The Ld. Special Judge, ACB had also held that when the FDR/KVP stood in the name of the family members of the accused, the burden was on the prosecution to show that the family members were the benamidars of the accused. In the absence of any such evidence, the assessee was acquitted of the charges levelled against him under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act. In the present case, the AO had made the addition only ....