TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 449X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . CIT(A); and we direct the Ld. CIT(A) to admit additional evidences already filed in the office of the Ld. CIT(A), and we further direct the Ld. CIT(A) to pass a fresh appellate order after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee - ITA No. 3259/Del/2019 - - - Dated:- 3-8-2022 - SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Ms. Kanika Jain , Advocate Respondent by : Sh. R. S. Yadav , Senior Departmental Representative ( Sr. DR for short) ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA , AM (A) This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [ Ld. CIT(A) , for short], dated 18/02/2019 for Assessment Year 2005-06. Grounds taken in this appeal are as under: 1. The order of CIT (A) is bad in law and on facts. 2. The CIT(A) Ld CIT(A) has erred in affirming the jurisdiction of the AO under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act), ignoring that order of the AO is without jurisdiction. 3. The order AO as affirmed by the CIT(A) is void ab initio as the same has been passed without following the mandate of Hon ble Apex Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al evidences further erred in not appreciating that this is a clear case of denial of proper opportunity by the AO, as is evident from the fact that effective hearing in this case started on 21.03.2013 and the AO has passed the order on 28.03.2013, without raising any further query from the assessee in respect of the issue in dispute. 13. The Ld CIT (A) has further failed to appreciate that even after search nothing has been unearthed during search which would prove that alleged receipt of 2,62,00,000/- is actually unaccounted income of assessee, had it been so the revenue could have taken action under section 153C instead of 148 of the Act. 14. The CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that despite search, neither any cash amounting to Rs. 2,62,00,000/- nor any asset corroborating such alleged receipt has been found in search, and the AO has made the addition on the basis of surmises and conjectures. 15. That on the facts and under the circumstances of the case the CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the impugned assessment has been framed with predetermined mind set, as the same has been framed, without refuting the documentary evidences, without confronting th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, a paper book was filed from the assessee s side containing the following particulars: Sr. No. Particulars 1. Annexure-1: Copy of the paper book filed before the CIT(A) on 27/06/2013 during the first round of appellate proceedings Copy of audited Balance Sheet and Profit Loss Account for the year ended 31/3/2005 relevant to the Assessment Year 2005-05. Copy of return of income along with computation of total income for Assessment Year 20005-06. Copy of Tax Audit report in Form 3CA and 3CD for the Assessment Year 2005-2006. Copy of intimation u/s 143(1) dated 01.05.2006 in respect of Assessment Year 2005-06. Copy of notice dated 29 03 2012 issued by ACIT Circle 9(1), New Delhi for re-opening the assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2005-2006. Copy of letter dated 26/04/2012 filed before Ld AO with the following explanations: (a) Raised objection that notice u/s 148 is defective and that in the original return of income duly filed on 29.10.2005 all material facts were truly and completely disclosed. ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Project Jaipuria Sunrise at Indirapuram. a project of Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd. and the said pages relates to period prior to 01.04.200 Details of land purchased by the appellant company during Financial Year 2004-05 alongwith copy of Registered Deeds in relation to allotment of plots at K-Home Abhay Khand-ll, Indira Puram, Ghaziabad, UP by Ghaziabad Development Authority in favour of the appellant company. Details of land sold during the year by the appellant company alongwith copy of Sale Deed dated 24.09 2004 made between SMV Agencies Pvt Ltd (Appellant) and Gaursons India Ltd in relation to sale of Plot K- Home Abhay Khand-ll, India Puram, Ghaziabad Details of flats/shops/plots in respect of which additions made by the AO in the order u/s 147/143(3) alongwith copy of allotment letters etc evidencing the fact that such flats have been sold by M/s Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers Pvt Ltd. and not by the appellant company. 2. Annexure-2: Copy of the documents filed before the CIT(A) in the remand proceedings. Copy of certificate from Jaipuria Infrastructure Developers Pvt Ltd I confirming that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Counsel for the assessee submitted further, that it was a case where no proper opportunity has been granted to the assessee; and also, that sufficient cause was advanced by the assessee for admission of additional evidence. The Ld. Counsel for appellant assessee also submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) should be directed to admit additional evidences already filed in the office of the Ld. CIT(A), and to pass a fresh appellate order after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. (C.1) Ld. Sr. DR for Revenue was in agreement with the submission of the Ld. CIT(A) for the assessee. He was also in agreement with the submissions of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, that the Ld. CIT(A) may be directed to admit additional evidences already filed in the office of the Ld. CIT(A), and to pass a fresh appellate order after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. (C.2) We have heard both sides. There was no material dispute between representatives of both sides (Ld. Counsel for assessee and Ld. Sr. DR for Revenue) at the time of hearing before us. It is not in dispute that during assessment proceedings, effective hearing commenced on 04/03/2013 for which the assessee filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
