9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - As far as Anand Singh is concerned, he had also stated in response to letter dated 10th July, 2008 that the payment had been made through banking channel but the bank statement was not available with him - he could not be found out subsequently and he did not furnish his photo copy of share certificate - keeping in view the smallness of amount and the matter being quite old and considering their replies, the addition made in respect of Santosh Gupta, Mukesh Bhatia and Basant Lal is liable to be set aside - in respect of other persons since assessee was not able to comply with the directions of the Tribunal, no interference is called for with the order of CIT(A) – Decided partly in favour of Assessee. - ITA No. 796/Del/2013 - - - Dated:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Basant Lal. 12. B.N. Shah. 13. Anand Singh. 14. Suraj Bhan. 15. Rajan Prasad. 4. The Assessing Officer has observed that in the case of following persons, the letters sent were received back with the following remark :- No person by such name / left without address / incomplete address or other comments by the postal department. 1. Anju Gulati 2. B.N.Shah. 3. Rajan Prasad. 4. Raj Matta. 5. Pawan Kumari. 6. Anand Singh. 7. Dharmapal Rawat. 8. Lata Sharma. 9. Babita Sharma. 10. Suraj Bhan. 5. The Assessing Officer required the assessee to produce the above persons by 25th January, 2008 vide his letter dated 10th July, 2008. The response received was as under :- 1. Pawan Kumar - S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to shri Anand Singh was received back with the following postal remarks. After trying, it was told that by this name, no person is available at 166-DLF . In case of other three persons, the reply was received and the photo copy of the share certificate was enclosed with the reply. The Assessing Officer pointed out that in the replies received above neither bank statements nor even particulars/ details of the bank accounts were given in the replies as all the investment by the above mentioned share applicants was made through bank D.D.s. Accordingly, Assessing Officer relying on the decision full bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Sophiya Finance and CIT Vs. Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. held that the provisions of Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts as well as law and are without providing proper opportunity of hearing to the Appellant. 8. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that it is evident from the assessment order that five persons confirmed the transactions and out of them three had sent the photo copies of share certificates also. He pointed out that in their replies they stated that since the details called for were more than 10 years old, therefore, they were not in a position to produce the same. He submitted that since the amounts are small and share holders have confirmed the shares being held by them, therefore, the addition deserves to be deleted. In respect of other persons Ld. Counsel pointed out that the matter is old and, therefore, assessee was not in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and also make necessary enquiries after allowing an opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 11. From the above observations it is evident that Tribunal had given specific directions to Assessing Officer to, inter alia, examine the bank account and DDs purchased by these persons. From the reply of three persons viz Shri Santosh Gupta, Mukesh Bhatia and Shri Basant Lal it is evident that the expressed their inability to produce the bank details as the same were more than 10 years old. However, they furnished the photo copies of the share certificates. As far as Anand Singh is concerned, he had also stated in response to letter dated 10th July, 2008 that the payment had been made through banking channel but the bank statement was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
