TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee that the money is received from the buyer remained unexplained, hence, addition was rightly sustained by the CIT(A). Addition on account of cash deposit - HELD THAT:- Cash deposit of ₹ 4 lacs in the bank account of the assessee is transferred to Madhuban Branch and not a part of the addition made by the AO of ₹ 16.40 lacs, therefore, the addition of ₹ 4 lacs made by the AO was rightly confirmed as this cash deposit could not be explained by the assessee during the course of assessment as well as appellate proceedings. Rework the calculations of capital loss - HELD THAT:- Relevant provisions does not allow set off of long term capital loss against any other head of income, hence, this claim of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts and circumstances of the case ,the Ld CIT(A)- 21 should have applied her mind and logic before accepting the contention of AO and rejecting my claim. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add to ,alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and/ or rescind all or any of the Grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing ,if necessary so arises. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short Act ) was carried out on the assessee at terminal 1D, IGI Airport, New Delhi by the ADIT(Inv.), AIU, New Delhi on 4.8.2013. Appraisal Report for the same was received in the office of ITO, Ward 69(1), (Erstwhile Ward-45(1)) on 21.10.2013. After ascertaining the corr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eemed to be the income of the assessee u/s. 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 for the AY 2014-15 and made the addition thereof. Further, the AO observed that on perusal of the ITS statement (Form 26AS) downloaded from the System, it is found that the assessee has made the cash deposit of ₹ 4,00,000/- on 4.7.2013 with SBI, Madhuban vide Account No. 30423197016. The AO asked to explain this cash credit alongwith evidences, but the assessee has neither filed any explanation nor any supporting evidence regarding the source of the cash deposits of ₹ 4,00,000/-, hence, the same amount was added back to the income of the assessee and accordingly, the assessee s income was assessed at ₹ 28,20,900/- and allowed to carry forward current yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd both the parties and perused the records especially the impugned order. As regards addition of ₹ 16.40 lacs is concerned, I note that assessee has claimed that the money was received against the sale of property of ₹ 32 lakhs out of which the Department has seized ₹ 24.70 lakhs but as the registered sale deed of this property is of ₹ 15.60 lakhs, the AO was right in holding that the amount of ₹ 16.40 lakhs is unaccounted as it could not be substantiated by any document of the buyer. Further, the AO has also summoned the buyer in this respect and asked for confirmation during the course of assessment proceedings but the buyer did not responds to this, hence, the explanation of the assessee that the money is r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
