9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d appellate proceedings before CIT(A) was over. Therefore, it will be appropriate to look into the additional evidence. While going through the additional evidence, we noticed that these are the primary evidences which will show the creditworthiness of the source of source which was asked by the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A). Therefore, we are admitting additional evidence and remanding back the entire issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for verifying this additional evidence and after going through the said evidence, arrive at a proper conclusion as to whether the addition in respect of Section 68 is sustainable or not Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. - I.T.A. No. 4455/DEL/2019 - - - Dated:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts in law in not giving adequate opportunity to the assessee to place on record the evidence to establish source of source of source of money. 3. The assessee filed its return of income on 13.08.2010 for the assessment year 2010-11 declaring loss of ₹ 52,931/-. Information was received from the office of Dy. Director of Income Tax (inv.)-l, New CGO Complex NH-NIT Faridabad (HARYANA) 121001 vide letter dated 25/02/2016 as follows: A survey u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on the premises of M/s RPS Infrastructure Group entities on 21/10/2013. The RPS Group is in the business of real estate development and Sh. Rakesh Chand Gupta and Shanti Prakash Gupta are the key ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer shall bad in law as the same are not in compliance with the statutory conditions prescribed u/s 147 read with 148 are pending on the basis of information received from Investigation Wing on the basis of borrowed satisfaction without independent application of mind and by indulging into conjucture and surmises is bad in law. The reasons to believe have been formed without any application of mind and merely on the basis of borrowed satisfaction. The Ld. AR in his submission has given the details of credentials of the companies which was allegedly submitted by A.O as dummy entities. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee has field ITRs of all the parties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments have material bearing on the issue involved and goes to the root of issue and established the assessee s case for negating the primary basis for making addition by the Assessing Officer which was sustaining by the CIT(A) by establishing the source of funds in the hands of Smt. Sumita Pandey. Therefore, the Ld. AR submitted that these additional evidence be admitted under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Rules 1962. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT(A) Vs. Text 100 India Pvt. Ltd. 351 ITR 57. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). The Ld. DR submitted that the additional evidence should not be admitted at this juncture. As regards the legal issue, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
