TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is no error or infirmity in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act and initiating reassessment proceedings. We, accordingly, confirm the findings of the ld. CIT(A). To this extent, reopening of the assessment is upheld. Merits of the addition, though the first appellate authority has accepted the additional evidences u/r. 46A of the Rules, but has not examined the explanation of the assessee that the source of cash deposits are duly reflected in her books of account regularly maintained by her. We are of the considered opinion that since the assessee has sought to explain the source of cash deposit from her books of account, the entries need to be examined. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we restore this issue to the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ords carefully perused and the judicial decisions relied upon by both the representatives duly considered. 4. At the very outset, in our considered opinion, there cannot be any decision which would be factually identical to the facts of the case of the assessee, MUTATIS MUTANDIS, in order to follow the findings given by the co-ordinate benches as well as the Hon'ble High Court. In fact, all the decisions of the co-ordinate benches and Hon'ble High Court relied upon by the ld. counsel for the assessee are based on specific facts on the basis of which the co-ordinate benches and the Hon'ble High Court have decided the appeal after analyzing the facts of the case in hand. 5. With these observations, we will now consider the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act on the basis of information available on record. 10. Assessment was completed as under: Return income ₹ 2,76,780/- Additions: (i) u/s 80C, as discussed above ₹ 1,00,000/- (ii) Cash depose as income from undisclosed sources, as discussed above ₹ 19,83,900/- (iii) Unexplained investment in property, as discussed above ₹ 35,10,000/- ₹ 58,70.680 11. The assessee assailed the assessment before the ld. CIT(A) challenging the validity of notice u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act. Accordingly, appellant's ground of appeal is dismissed. 13. On merits of the additions, the ld. CIT(A) admitted the additional evidences, considered the explanation of the assessee and accepted the explanation of the assessee in respect of the source of cash deposited to the extent of ₹ 3.25 lakhs and confirmed the addition of ₹ 15.81 lakhs. 14. In so far as the investment in purchase of property is concerned, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced with the explanation of the assessee and deleted the addition of ₹ 35.10 lakhs. 15. Before us, relying upon various judicial decisions, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently stated that without any application of mind, the Assessing Officer has issued noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refore, it can be safely concluded that the Assessing Officer had reasons to believe and form an opinion that income has escaped assessment, which prompted him to issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act. 19. The ld. counsel for the assessee had vehemently stated that the Assessing Officer should have made enquiries before issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act. We fail to understand what enquiries the ld. counsel for the assessee was expecting from the Assessing Officer. The ld. counsel for the assessee cannot expect the Assessing Officer to ask the Bank Manager to explain the source of cash deposited by an account holder. Nor the Assessing Officer can ask the Sub-Registrar to explain the source of purchase of property by the assessee. 20. In ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
