TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the hands of Bilash Khatiwada. Income tax authorities concerned, at Delhi, have also been impleaded in the hope that some clarifications and updates will be forthcoming on the aforesaid issues. However, though the impugned order makes it clear that a portion of the amount seized has, according to the Department, been assessed in the hands of Bilash Khatiwada, as to the balance, the respondents are unable to provide any clarity and, learned standing counsels say that there has been response to their communications in this regard from their counterparts in Delhi. We see merit in the request of the petitioner to challenge order by way of appeal against the non-grant of credit of a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as directed by the Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the investigation carried out by the Department did not reveal any source of funds for Bilash Khatiwada and thus, taking note of the preponderance of probabilities, the entire amount was brought to tax as undisclosed income of the petitioner under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act 1961 ( Act ). (iv) The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of assessment, interalia challenging the aforesaid addition under Section 69A. However, during the appeal proceedings, the petitioner gave up that ground of appeal, and acquiescing with the inclusion of the amount at its income, consequently prayed for a direction for credit of the sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as against the tax demands. (v) The appellate authority found merit in this submission a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r petition on merits within three weeks of receipt of its order. In this regard, it is to inform you that the cash of Rs.50 lakhs was seized in the hands of Shri Bilash Khatiwada, who was assessed with the ACIT(CC)-25, New Delhi and the seized cash was transferred in the PD account of Pr. CIT, Central-1, Delhi. This office vide letter dated 30.07.2018 to the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-25, Delhi, requested to prepare the para wise comments stating the reasons for not transferring the seized cash of Rs. 50 lakhs lying in the PD account of Pr. CIT, Central-1, Delhi to the PD account of Pr.CIT, Central-2, Chennai. In response to which the PCIT(C)-1, New Delhi, vide letter dated 23.08.2018 intimated that out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re has been response to their communications in this regard from their counterparts in Delhi. 5. In such circumstances, I see merit in the request of the petitioner to challenge order dated 26.09.2016 by way of appeal against the non-grant of credit of a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- as directed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) in order dated 07.01.2016. The appellate authority would be better positioned, seeing as the issue in this matter relates, prima facie, the double taxation of the amount of Rs.50,00,000/-, once in the hands of the petitioner and secondly, in the assessment of Bilash Khatiwada. 6. The petitioner is granted liberty to avail of appellate remedy within four weeks from today and appeal, if filed as aforesaid, sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
