9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. AO is illegal and bad in law. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in not quashing the assessment order despite categorical finding that the Ld. AO has not passed a speaking order and has rejected submissions of the assesse with casual remarks. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in law in upholding additions of Rs. 3,32,313/- to the income of the assesse on his own presumptions without allowing any opportunity of being heard in this regard. 4. That the addition of Rs. 3,32,313/- made by Ld. AO and upheld by Ld. C1T(A) is not tenable under the law because of being made only on presumptions without any incriminating evidence in this regard. 5. That the addition of Rs. 3,32,313/- made u/s 69A o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... investment made in cash. Aggrieved against this the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals), who after considering the submissions restricted the addition to the extent of Rs. 3,32,313/-. Aggrieved by this the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee vehemently argued that the authorities below were not justified in making and sustaining the addition as the assessee had placed all evidences related to such expenditure. He submitted that due to typographical error wrong year was mentioned before the Investigation Wing of the Revenue. He submitted that there was no incriminating material. Therefore, the impugned addition could not have been sustained. He submitted that the suffici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ash expense of Rs 3,32,313 in FY 2017-18. It is strange that the appellant does not have any evidence of making this expense, does not remember the nature of expense , but remembers the exact date of making this cash expense. To my opinion, the appellant had given correct information to the Investigation Wing, but later in the absence of much cash in hand available with family members, she had tried to explain it from the available cash in hand of FY 2017-18. This is clearly an afterthought as this isolated expense had been claimed in FY 2017-18 without any description of construction expense after completion of the house. In these facts and circumstances of the case, the plea of the appellant cannot be accepted and it is held that this exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
