TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pportunity. Accordingly in the facts and circumstances of the case I deem it appropriate to remit the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer. Assessing Officer should pass an order afresh after giving the assessee proper opportunity of being heard. Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No. 490/Mum/2020 - - - Dated:- 21-10-2021 - Shri Shamim Yahya ( AM ) Assessee by : None Department by : Ms. Smita Verma ORDER Per Shamim Yahya , AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short learned CIT(A)] dated 15.3.2016 pertaining to assessment year 2013-14. 2. The grounds of appeal read as under:- 1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red in law and in facts to come to the conclusion that The appellant has not been able to substantiate with the aid of any cogent material as regards the transaction of sale of plot and which is contrary to facts as apparent from appeal order itself and The learned CIT has erred to pass the order without considering the material/evidences submitted before him in the form of (1) (Details of name alongwith full details of plot and address vide letter dated 23.11.15, (2) The details of sale for A.Y. 14-15 vide letter dated 11/2/16, (3) cash book, (4) the fact that booking amount has been converted to sales on 8.4.13 vide registered sale deed, (5) Books audited u/s. 44AB, (6) so e deed dated 3/4/18 and which shows that cash receipt of above amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses- vide letter dated 23.11.15 vide point no. 15 (3) The details of purchases vide letter dated 23.11.15 vide point no. 9 (4) The detail of expenses exceeding 50,000/- vide letter dated 23.11.15 vide point no. 15(5) All stock details at point no 3 of letter dated 23.11.15. 4. The CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts to confirm action of AO in spite of the fact that The AO/CIT(A) has nowhere specified which details have not been submitted except a bald Statement. 5. The CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts not quashing the order when the AO failed to issue show cause for above addition and which is against the contravention of CBDT Instruction No. 20/2015, Central Board of Direct dated 29th of December, 2015 and Any attempt of not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sked to submit details of cash deposits made into the Bank Accounts during the year along with its source. In response vide letter dated 23.11.2015 the assessee submitted his reply. The submission made by the assessee was considered but not found to be acceptable. The assessee was specifically asked to submit details of source of cash deposits, it is pertinent to note that vide letter dated 25.02.2016 the assessee submitted cash book for the FY 2012-13. The pattern of receipts from Babulal Jain Relatives at the fag end of FY in denomination of ₹ 1,95,000/- each for cash deposit in bank account to be reported in AIR is highly suspicious. The assessee did not submit the details at the first instance in his letter dated 23.11.2015 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ails of Direct expenses along with name and address of the parties to whom such payments were made alongwith copies of sample bills and copies of ledger accounts etc. In response the assessee submitted details vide letter dated 23.11.2015, 06.01.2016 11.02.2016 which were placed on record. The details submitted by assessee were carefully perused. The assessee has shown revenue from two projects i.e. project 1 project 2 under both these projects the assessee had purchased land and sold some plots out of such land. The sale is made at ₹ 2500/- per sq. mtrs. And the cost of sales was computed at ₹ 2060.66 ₹ 1786.63 per sq. mtrs. respectively. Looking at the project cost claimed by the assessee in several ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to the addition made by the Assessing Officer on ad-hoc basis @50% of the sales. The case of the Assessing Officer is that the appellant is a developer of plots wherein he buys plot of big size and then develops them and sells them of small size and thus, the profits earned would be large. The details of expenses incurred on the development of the plot have been asked for by the Assessing Officer during the course of the assessment proceedings which the Assessing Officer has claimed have not been filed by the appellant and thus, having no choice left with him, an estimation has been done by him at 50% of the sales 4.2.2 Considering the facts in the present case together with the submissions of the appellant and primarily submission o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
