TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 653X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer under section 68 as income from undisclosed sources on account of unexplained cash credit. The ld. AR of assessee has contended that the assessee had made declaration under VDIS but the same was not accepted. He has contended that the addition of ₹ 2,17,600 under dispute was made in reassessment proceedings under section 147 initiated on the basis of survey in the case of V.D. Trivedi and the statement of V.D. Trivedi was recorded during survey in Trivedi's case. He has contended that the assessee has not been allowed opportunity of cross-examining V.D. Trivedi; and that the report of survey in the case of V.D. Trivedi was supplied to assessee only during hearing of arguments before ld. CIT(A). He has contended that the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uired. He has cited the following decisions in support of his contention : (1) Mriganka Mohan Sur v. CIT (1979) 120 ITR 529(Cal.) (2) CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC). He has referred to page 3 of Assessing Officer and contended that in Balance Sheet for assessment year 1997-98, assessee has not shown any asset in the form of cut and polished diamond or diamond jewellery, so where is the question of sale of diamond by assessee? He has referred to bottom para on page 2 and top para on page 3 of Assessing Officer and contended that as regards allowing of opportunity of cross-examination to assessee, the Assessing Officer had issued summons to Dhananjay Diamonds for the purpose but the summons were returned by postal aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the addition has been made on the basis of statement of V.D. Trivedi recorded during survey, but no opportunity of cross-examining him having been allowed to the assessee, the said statement cannot be relied upon and in turn, cannot be made basis of addition. The onus of proving sale of diamond does lie on assessee no doubt, but the assessee having depended upon Assessing Officer for effecting the presence of V.D. Trivedi for cross-examination and the Assessing Officer also having issued summons to V.D. Trivedi, it cannot thereafter be pleaded by the department that the assessee failed to produce V.D. Trivedi for proving sale of diamond by assessee to V.D. Trivedi. The summons having been returned unserved by the postal authorities with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
