Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (1) TMI 864

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wing revised grounds of appeal: "1. i) The order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is contrary to law and the facts of the case. ii) That the learned AO in law as well as on fact erred in reopening the case as it is issued for verification of return. iii) That the learned AO erred in reopening the case without obtaining approval from the competent authority. 2. The Honorable Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in sustaining addition of Rs.5,00,000/- made u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act being unexplained expenditure is arbitrary and without basis. The additions are liable to be deleted. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add to and/or amend, alter, rescind the grounds taken here in above, before or at the ti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ings, it was, inter alia, stated by the assessee that the same comprised of the refund of loans of Rs.5 lac which were earlier advanced by him to his four relatives, viz. (i) Shri Vijay Chirania-Brother : Rs.1,50,000/-; (ii) Shri Vinod Rungta- Brother in law : Rs.1,00,000/-; (iii) Shri Pankaj Chirania-Brother : Rs.1,50,000/- and (iv) Shri Manish Chirania : Rs.1,00,000/-. The A.O in order to verify the authenticity of the aforesaid claim of the assessee though directed him to produce the aforementioned persons, but the assessee expressed his inability to do so. At the same time, the assessee placed on record affidavits of the aforesaid persons. The A.O in order to verify the authenticity of the aforesaid claim of the assessee issued notices .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .e. beyond the stipulated time period. Our attention was drawn by the Ld. AR to the copy of the notice u/s.143(2) dated 13.11.2016, Page 26 of APB. It was, thus, the claim of the Ld. AR that as the assessment in question had been framed on the basis of notice issued u/s. 143(2) dated 13.11.2006, i.e., a notice issued beyond the prescribed time period, therefore, the same was liable to be quashed. On merits, it was the claim of the Ld. AR that as the investment of Rs.5 lac (supra) towards purchase of the property in question was clearly sourced from the funds which were available with the assessee out of the cash repayment of loans by his relatives, therefore, both the lower authorities had grossly erred in making/sustaining the addition of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 10. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the contentions advanced by the ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties. Apropos, the claim of the Ld. AR that the A.O had grossly erred in law in framing the assessment vide his order passed u/ss.147/143(3) dated 20.11.2007, for the reason that the same had been framed on the basis of notice u/s.143(2) dated 13.11.2006, i.e., a notice issued beyond the stipulated time period, we do not find favour with the same. In our considered view the Ld. AR had absolutely proceeded with on the basis of misconceived facts. As observed by us hereinabove, the assessee in compliance to the notice issued u/s.148 dated 01.08.2006 had vide his letter dated 07.08.2006 requested that his original retu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... perusal of the records, it transpires that the assessee had made cash withdrawals of Rs.5 lac out of the aforesaid refunds as were credited in his bank account over the period 08.07.2002 to 26.03.2003, as under: Date Particulars 08.07.2002 Rs.50,000/- 19.12.2002 Rs.2,00,000/- 26.03.2003 Rs.2,50,000/- Total Rs.5,00,000/- Although, it is the claim of the assessee that the aforesaid cash withdrawals were available with him to source the investment to the extent of Rs.5 lac, but the same in our considered view is nothing but an unsubstantiated claim raised by him in thin air. Although our attention was drawn by the Ld. AR to the 'balance sheet' of the assessee as on 31.03.2003, which revealed cash in hand of Rs.6,63,600.50, however, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates