TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 568
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arbitrary, against law and facts on record. 2. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) failed to appreciate that the issuance of notices u/s 153A / 142(1)/143(2 ) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing officer and the proceedings conducted there under are against the provisions contained in the Income Tax Act, 1961 and is bad in law and hence liable to be quashed. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) while confirming the addition has failed to consider the fact that during the course of search no incriminating documents have been found in respect of addition made and as such addition made by the Assessing officer while passing the order u/s 153A/ 143 (3) is against the provision contained in the Income Tax Act, 1961. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) is arbitrary, against law and facts on record. 2. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) failed to appreciate that the issuance of notices u/s 153A / 142(1)/143(2 ) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing officer and the proceedings conducted there under are against the provisions contained in the Income Tax Act, 1961 and is bad in law and hence liable to be quashed. 3. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) while confirming the addition has failed to consider the fact that during the course of search no incriminating documents have been found in respect of addition made and as such addition made by the Assessing officer while passing the order u/s 153A/ 143 (3) is against the provision co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nst the provision contained in the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has erred in law as much as on the facts of the case by not admitting the additional grounds of appeal during the appellate proceeding and such action of the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) is bad in law. 5. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has erred much as on the facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs.48,77,600/- under the head commission income which have been made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of assumption and presumption and is not based on cogent material and is bad in law and hence liable to be delete." 5. In ITA No. 5657/Del/2017 , the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 12.02 .2013 at the residential and business premises of the assessee. A.Y. 2007 -08 : Agricultural Income: 7. The addition made treating the agricultural income as "income from other source" has been deleted by the ITAT in assessee' s own case for the A.Y. 2008-09 , 2009 -10, 2010-11 vide order dated 17.03.2022 in ITA No. 5652-5654 /Del/2017. In the absence of any change in the factual matrix, we hereby delete the addition made by the AO. 8. The appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed. Addition on the basis of Mo U: 9. Based on MOU dated 07 .03.2006 found during search for purchase of property no. 9/11 , Nehru Place, Delhi, the AO made addition of Rs.1,16,00,000 /-. The relevant facts are as under:....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s the net commission income earned. The assessee gets relief of 0.4% on the commission income determined. A.Y. 2013 -14 : Unexplained cash and Jewellery: 13. The AO made addition of Rs.7,03 ,200/- on account of the cash found during the search. 14. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 15. We find from the record that no statement of the assessee with regard to the cash found has been recorded u/s 132 (4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and statement recorded of the father of the assessee Sh. Jaiveer Tyagi on day of search itself revealed that the amount pertains Sh. Jaiveer Tyagi and other family members. There was a clear demarcation of the dwelling premises pertaining to the father of the ....