9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 918X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sustaining the addition of Rs. 49,50,000/- under section 69 of Income Tax Act, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred by not following the principles of natural justice as he did not pass a speaking appellate order. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal. 2. The only effective ground is against sustaining the addition of Rs. 49,50,000/- u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as 'the Act'). The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was framed vide o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from various persons. The confirmations of the persons were also furnished during the assessment proceedings. However, the assessee realised that the submissions made before the A.O. were not correct as the amount was received from contribution by the brother of the assessee. The amount was remitted by the brother of the assessee. The assessee is not very educated person. He was not aware of the nitty gritty of the law. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the evidence supporting the contention that the amount was remitted from abroad and there were cash withdrawals as well. He drew our attention to bank statement enclosed with paper book. Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee. The only explanation before this Tribunal for taking such contradictory stand is that in support of the contention documents furnished before the authorities below are third party documents, which cannot be termed as self-created and self-served documents. The assessee has demonstrated with evidence that the brother of the assessee has been remitting money from Kuwait and the cash was being withdrawn by the father of the assessee. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue by observing as under: 7. From the above, it is clear that the contention of the assessee was not accepted by the Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee has been changing his stance. However, the assessee has also furnished certain documentary eviden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
