9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of notice several times. Therefore, we proceed to decide appeal ex parte qua the assessee after hearing the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR on behalf of the Department. 3. Though the assessee has raised as many as seven grounds in this appeal but except ground no. 3 to 6 others are argumentative and supportive to the main grounds which are as follows: - "3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 39,76,185/- allegedly on the ground that the cash deposits are unexplained and that too by recording incorrect facts and findings and without observing the principles of natural justice. 4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld.C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of cash withdrawals from the bank account of assessee. Therefore, the orders of the authorities below are bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The Ld. Sr. DR supporting the orders of the authorities below submitted that since the assessee has failed to explain the source of cash deposits to his bank account, therefore, the addition made by the AO may kindly be upheld. 6. On careful consideration of above submissions, findings and observations recorded by the AO as well as Ld.CIT(A), we note that the AO made addition of Rs. 43,54,000/- on account of cash deposits to the bank account of assessee. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld.CIT(A) and the part addition of Rs. 6,13,330/- was deleted extracting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing grounds of assessee. 8. Replying to the above, the Ld. Sr. DR supported the action of the AO and submitted that the AO made addition of Rs. 9,81,020/- on account of capital gain arises on the sale of property. He further contented that the Ld.CIT(A) after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the issue while adjudicating the ground no. 4 of assessee as per Form 35 rightly held that the proportionate long term capital gain in the hands of the assessee come to Rs. 1,58,117/- granting major part of relief. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the calculation approved by the Ld.CIT(A) was given by the assessee himself, therefore, no interference is called for therein. 9. On careful consideration of above submission, we note that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthority has erred in confirming the action of the AO in framing the impugned reassessment order which is apparently bad in law and not sustainable. 12. Replying to the above, the Ld. Sr. DR drew our attention towards para 4.7 to 4.14 of first appellate order and submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has categorically noted that the case laws relied upon the assessee was not applicable to the facts of the present case. He also submitted that after evaluation of legal contentions of assessee the Ld.CIT(A) rightly dismissed ground no. 1 & 2 of assessee. 13. On careful consideration of submissions, we note that the Ld.CIT(A) in para 4.10 has reproduced the relevant part of the reasons recorded by the AO for initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
