TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Amrit Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. we find merit into these submissions of the assessee as the revenue has based its finding on the basis of certain documents belonging to third party where certain entry is recorded by that third party relating to the assessee. A.O. before making assessment should have granted opportunity of cross examining such person - set aside the assessment order and restore the issue of assessment to the file of the A.O. to make a de-novo assessment after providing opportunity of cross examination to the assessee. A.O. would decide on the basis of material available on record and the cross examination made by the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - ITA No.673/Ind/2017 - - - Dated:- 18- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest charged u/s 234A and 234B is arbitrary and erroneous. 2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the case of the assessee reopened by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as the Act ). In response thereto, the assessee requested that the income declared in the original return may be considered. The basis of reopening was that the assessee had made cash payments of ₹ 11 lakhs on 25.12.2010 for purchase of immovable property worth ₹ 36,50,000/-. After considering the explanation of the assessee, the A.O. treated the sum of ₹ 11 lakhs as unexplained and added into his income. Against this, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal. Now ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he proceedings. 5. On the contrary, Ld. D.R. opposed the submissions and submitted that the information can be gathered on the basis that the assessing officer can reopen the assessment even income is escaped. He submitted that admittedly on the basis of survey on the third party it was found that the assessee has made cash payment to the concerned party. Under these facts, the A.O. was justified in reopening the assessment. He submitted that law does not envisage that A.O. should determine the veracity of the information before issuing notice for reopening of the assessment. He submitted that on the basis of information so received, the assessing officer has to form a belief about escapement of income. The decision as relied by the Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation is correct or false. Such exercise would be carried out only after issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. Hence, this contention of the assessee is rejected. Another contention of the assessee is that he was not provided opportunity of cross examining Shri Deepak Gupta and the Directors of M/s. Amrit Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. I find merit into these submissions of the assessee as the revenue has based its finding on the basis of certain documents belonging to third party where certain entry is recorded by that third party relating to the assessee. The A.O. before making assessment should have granted opportunity of cross examining such person. I therefore hereby set aside the assessment order and restore the issue of assessment to the file of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
