9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2781X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing affidavits in support of the applications of the parties. Such affidavits ought to be filed only by the party concerned. 3. Turning to the application the Court finds that the reasons adduced for the delay of 795 days (i.e. over two years and one month) is not convincing at all. The only explanation is that delay occurred in curing the defects pointed out by the Registry. By no stretch of imagination, can a delay of over two years and one month in curing defects be countenanced. 4. The Court is, therefore, not inclined to condone the delay of 795 days in re-filing the appeal. This is one of several instances of the Revenue's appeals being re-filed with extraordinary delay ranging between one and three years. This Court has in cert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned on his activity of hundi discount. Thereafter a questionnaire was issued to him requiring him to disclose the names of the borrowers and lenders in whose names the cash transactions were recorded in the seized material. Mr. Brij Mohan Gupta is supposed to have stated in his reply dated 30th November 2006 that as far as the borrowers and lenders were concerned, their identity was established with their names and addresses being found in the list already with the IT Department. 8. As far as the Assessee is concerned, his name was purportedly found mentioned found in the material seized from the premises of Mr. Brij Mohan Gupta. However, the Assessee contested the veracity of the documents seized from the premises of Mr. Brij Mohan Gu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act that this appellant's premises have also been subjected to search and seizure operations u/s 132 of IT Act in 2006 i.e. two years later and well before the assessment order was passed in 2008." It was further pointed out by the CIT (A) that in none of the statements recorded during or after the search action of Mr. Brij Mohan Gupta or his associates, the name and identity of "MP Gupta" had been linked with the Assessee. Thirdly, he was not afforded opportunity of cross-examining Mr. Brij Mohan Gupta and other individuals involved in the matter. The mere surrender of undisclosed income by Mr. Brij Mohan Gupta did not automatically establish the liability in the hands of the Assessee "unless he is evidently linked with the accounts of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that he should be permitted to place before this Court the entire record of the case including the record before the AO. Secondly, Mr. Sahni submitted that since the Court had already admitted the Revenue's appeal in the case of Atul Gupta, it should admit the present appeal as well and hear it along with the appeal of Atul Gupta. 13. The above submissions fail to persuade this Court to interfere with the matter. Concurrent findings of fact have been rendered by the CIT (A) as well as by the ITAT. Nothing has been pleaded in the memorandum of appeal to persuade the Court to hold that those findings are perverse or contrary to the facts on record. Secondly, there is not a whisper in the order of the AO about any bag recovered from the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
