TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 1207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts - Documents produced during the assessment proceedings are not reflecting the source of cash deposits whether the gifts are genuine or not. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR has also not produced any additional evidence to that extent and also not demonstrated from whom the gifts were received and whether the gifts are genuine or not. Therefore, on merits the assessee s case does not stand and, therefore, ground no.nil to the extent of merits in Column Nos.7, 8 9 stand dismissed Other grounds mentioned in original Form No.36 and in the revised grounds both are alleging the authorities in personal capacity which is uncalled act of the professional who is guiding his respective client i.e. assessee. Despite giving several opportunities to the Ld. AR, the Ld. AR was adamant to concise the grounds of appeal on the jurisdiction point as well as on merit point. The observation made hereinabove related to the jurisdiction point and merits should be taken into account as entirely deciding the appeal on merit as well as law. Appeal of the assessee is dismissed. - ITA No.204/Ahd/2019 - - - Dated:- 25-11-2022 - Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Ki ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e interest on the disputed re-assessed income of the Act ? On the facts of this case and in law, there is the violation of various articles of the Constitution i.e. 21, 19, 20, 13 14 of the Constitution of India. 3. As per Form No.36, the statement of facts given by the assessee are as follows:- The Appellant being a resident individual earning income from employment and other sources i.e. interest income, had duly filed his Return of Income on 15.08.2015 therein disclosing a total income amounting to Rs.2,84,028 and had duly paid tax thereon amounting to Rs.1,445. As per second proviso to the subsection (1) of the section 143 the AO was accorded enough time to conduct inquiry proceeding and gather all necessary facts and documents relating to the income of the assessee i.e. upto 31.03.2017. The AO, after considering all the facts of the case as he considered fit, found no discrepancy with the furnished true total income and passed the order u/s.143(1) on 24.11.2015 i.e. within three months. Thereafter, to the surprise of the Appellant, a notice u/s.143(2) of the act is issued on 28.07.2016 without conducting the necessary inquiry proceeding by the AO and with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he CIT(A)-7 has himself expressed that the Appellant had received gifts from close relatives but alleged that the Appellant had net received from such persons without having any adverse finding against the Appellant's claim. Both the AO and the CIT(A)-7 choreographed a flimsy case and on the basis of mere suspicion, conjecture and assumption made the addition. In para 6 of the appellate order, the contention of the GT(A)-7 regarding the character of the depositor as to why he retained volumes of cash with him is untenable and ridiculous as he cannot interfere in the cash management of any person. In para 6 of the appellate order, the CIT(A)-7 wrongly interpreted section 68 of the Act. The section says that only where the assessee offers no explanation or the explanation offered by him is not satisfactory, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer can make such credits assessable to tax. In this case the Appellant had given his best explanation elaborately about the source of the cash deposits, however both the AO as well as the CIT(A)-7 willfully rejected Appellant's explanation with their soaring mala fide impulsion in order to cause prejudice to the Appellant. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve illegal direction to a taxman to initiate a trial for an occult, cabbalistic and clandestine unilateral lis? 5. Whether a non-jurisdictional taxman by overruling the power controlling and supervisory authority can impersonate himself as a legal person to initiating a unilateral trial for some occult, cabbalistic and clandestine lis ? 6. Else, whether the non-jurisdictional legal sanctioning taxman, can empower to accord and award sanction based upon occult, cabbalistic and clandestine Us without taking its legitimate cognizance while granting legal sanction to institute a trial to a non-jurisdictional legal person upon the appellant? 7. Whether the alleged synthetic legal person, can accelerate a unilateral occult, cabbalistic and clandestine trial by overruling the settled proposition of law Judex non-potwat esse testis in propria causa and Non refert quid notum sit judici si notum non sit in forma judicii and doctrine of estoppel for the respective documents and intimidate appellant to do some acts contrary to/us gentium by the act done at the color office? 8. Whether the alleged synthetic legal person can elevate another taxman amidst of alleged trial as h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e settled principle of law Lex neminem cogit ad vana seu impossiblia, whether a successive alleged legal person can direct the appellant to file an appeal against unilateral unconstitutional, nonjurisdictional, non-judicious, non-appealable order based upon a unilateral trial and aforethought lis? 16. Following the proposition of \aw judex non potest esse testis in propria causa and judicis est jus dicers, non dare, whether the alleged concurrent first appellate authority can accelerate unilateral appellate trial without confining his concurrent appellate jurisdiction based upon unconstitutional, non-jurisdictional, non-judicious, non-appealable order in favor of occult and clandestine person? 17. Following the proposition of law judex non potest esse testis in propria causa and judicis est jus dicere, non dare, whether alleged appellate authority can accelerate unilateral appellate trial by arbitrarily giving a prerogative right to the alleged legal persons; an occult and clandestine person to remain absentee from the appellate trial without taking cognizable reasons on record? 18. Whether the alleged legal person and occult and clandestine person, have a prerogativ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income by an ultra vires criminal act, derogating the constitution of India and established law is sustainable in law? 24. Following the settled principle of law Bonus judex secundum aequum et bonum judicat, eteuitatem stricto juri praefert, whether the alleged legal person directly or indirectly involved underneath jus gentium, are conjointly liable for civil and criminal for their ultra vires act following the civil and criminal code established by the law? 25. Following the settled principle of law Bonus judex secundum aequum et bonum judicat, et euitatem stricto juri praefert and Quifadt per alium facit per se, whether the alleged state authorities are liable for department inquiry and legitimate consequential action against the alleged authorities following the rules and protocol established underneath the Central Civil Service (Conduct) Rule, 1964 in alignment with other rules and protocol? 26. Following the settled rule of law and equity Bonus judex secundum aequum et bonum judicat, et euitatem stricto juri praefert and Qui facit per alium facit perse, the alleged public servant and other associate persons are conjointly liable to compensate for cost of entire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Officer and because the same was not informed, the assessment is not justified. But after perusal of the assessment records which was produced during the hearing and the same was inspected by the Ld. AR Shri Kishore Goyal, CA on 19.04.2022 as recorded in the said assessment records. It can be seen that the assessee has filed return of income on 15.08.2015 with Assessing Officer, Ward 7(1)(5), Ahmedabad, PAN No. of the assessee is AGKPT6559M and the notice which was issued by the respective ITO was also that of Ward 7(1)(5). Merely change in the Assessing Officer of the similar rank cannot be stated as not having jurisdiction for conducting assessment proceedings as well as passing assessment order. Therefore, all the contentions taken by the assessee which were incorporated in the original grounds of appeal as well in the revised grounds of appeal as well as the submissions before us does not stand at all in the eyes of law. Hence, all the contentions of the Ld. AR are rejected. 8. As regards the merits of the case, there is no specific ground except ground no.12 of the revised grounds and ground nos. (Column Nos.7, 8 9) are placed/contested before us. From the perusal of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
