TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 989X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son, during the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) and the same was ignored. We, observe that such action of the Ld. Assessing Officer of making addition in the hands of assessee based on 3rd party statement/evidence cannot withstand unless proper opportunity of cross examination is provided to the assessee. See ANDAMAN TIMBER INDUSTRIES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA-II [ 2015 (10) TMI 442 - SUPREME COURT] . Assessee has not been provided any opportunity of cross examination of the parties who have stated to have received on money from sale of land. We, thus, set aside the finding of Ld. CIT(A) and delete the addition. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 130/Ind/2020 - - - Dated:- 21-9-2021 - SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Shri Pankaj Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri P.K. Singhi, Sr. DR ORDER PER MANISH BORAD, A.M The above captioned appeal filed at the instance of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-I (in short Ld. CIT], Indore dated 05.01.2020 which is arising out of the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in search proceedings at the premises of seller of property and thus the proceedings ought to have been invoked under Section 153C of the Act. Accordingly the Appellant prays that the order be held invalid and directed to be quashed. 3.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in not holding the action of AO as invalid in not providing the third party external information based on which the case has been reopened. Accordingly the Appellant prays that the basis on which exercise has been carried out is in violation of principles of natural justice the assessment be held to be invalid and directed to be quashed. 4.On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of AO in not providing the opportunity to cross examine the persons who have allegedly stated to have received on money from the Appellant, inspite of specific request for it. Accordingly reliance placed on third party external information without affording opportunity of cross examination makes the assessment invalid in violation of principles of natural justice and renders the assessment be held to be invalid. 5.O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 was carried out at the business premises of Garha Group of Indore along with Apollo Group, Indore on 21.09.2012. During the course of search action, several incrementing documents have been found and seized. As per information, M/s Rani Agro pvt. Ltd. had undertaken a project in the name of Gold Green and Gold Link during the period from F.Y. 2009-10. It was a joint venture project with Apollo Group in the ratio of 60% to M/s Rani Agro Pvt. Ltd. and 40% to the Apollo Group, Indore. During the course of search proceedings, it was established that M/s. Rani Agro Pvt. Ltd. and Apollo Group have accepted on money from the persons who have purchase plots. It has been sought to my notice that the Garha Group of Indore had filed petition for settlement before the settlement Commission. In the Excel Sheet filed along with application to settlement Commission, the name of the appellant was mentioned as one who had paid on money in purchase of plot. Therefore, on the basis of admission of Garha Group of Indore and Apollo Group, it has to be concluded that appellant has paid the on-money which is also based on various incriminating documents found during the course of search. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity inasmuch as it amounted to violation of principles of natural justice because of which the assessee was adversely affected. It is to be borne in mind that the order of the Commissioner was based upon the statements given by the aforesaid two witnesses. Even when the assessee disputed the correctness of the statements and wanted to cross-examine, the Adjudicating Authority did not grant this opportunity to the assessee. It would be pertinent to note that in the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority he has specifically mentioned that such an opportunity was sought by the assessee. However, no such opportunity was granted and the aforesaid plea is not even dealt with by the Adjudicating Authority. As far as the Tribunal is concerned, we find that rejection of this plea is totally untenable. The Tribunal has simply stated that cross-examination of the said dealers could not have brought out any material which would not be in possession of the appellant themselves to explain as to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
