9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Officer, DCIT, Central Circle, Noida are bad in law and against the facts of the case. 2. That the Assessing Officer was wrong to make an addition of Rs.76,75,000/- and the CIT(A) was wrong to have confirmed the addition of Rs.76,75,000/- on account of alleged payment made in cash for purchase of property. 3. That after the original assessment proceedings were over and the proceedings u/s.153C were pending, the Assessing Officer proceeded to rectify the assessment order based on the information received from the audit party and made addition of Rs.24,04,399/-. The information received from Audit party does not warrant rectification, but only a fresh assessment proceeding can be initiated, if required. The scope of rectification proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 30/01/2019, the assessee preferred the present appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 4. Ground No.1 is general in nature, which requires no adjudication. 5. In ground No. 4, the assessee challenged the initiation of assessment proceedings u/s 153C of the Act as without jurisdiction and bad in law on account of absence of a valid satisfaction note prior to initiation. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that no satisfaction note has been prepared by the AO in the capacity of AO of the searched party that the assets/documents seized pertaining to the (assessee) remained with the AO of the searched person and were not transferred to the AO of the assessee i.e. the other perso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... found and seized. On pages 37 to 49 of Annexure LP-2 there is an agreement between Shri Rishi Agarwal, S/o Shri Rajendra Agarwal R/o C-64, Sector-47, Noida and Shri Buti S/o Shri ....R/o Village Momna Thal Pargana Dankaur Tehsil and District Gautam Budh Nagar on 01.03.2012. The agreement pertains to sale of land area of 343 sq. meters and the total consideration mentioned in the agreement is Rs.30,87,000/-. Shri Rishi Agarwal made the payment of advance of Rs.27,80,000/- through cheque no.148488 on 20.03.2012. Further on page 36 of Annexure LP-2 paper/document was seized as per which Shri Rishi Agarwal made cash payment of Rs.76,75,000/- for purchase of the said land. These seized documents pertain to Shri Rishi Agarwal and the information ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3C of the Act. Thus, we find no merit in ground No.4 of the assessee, accordingly, the ground No.4 is dismissed. 10. Ground No. 2, 5 to 10 are against the confirmation of addition of Rs.76,75,000/- made u/s 69 of the Act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition has been made based on the dumb document and the said document does not bear date or signature, there is no head note and the authorities have wrongly read and interpreted the handwriting jottings, therefore, submitted that the additions made by the AO, which has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be deleted. 11. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the Lower Authorities. 12. We have heard the parties and perused th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transaction which were related neither to the assessee nor to Sh. Buti Singh (seller) which demonstrates that neither the assessee nor the seller was the author of the document. The loose paper did not belong to the assessee or to the seller, there is no description or comment explaining the hand written jottings-whether it represented a proposal for purchase or construction by the builder or payment between assessee and right seller, there is no date of receipt or payment mentioned against any figure, the content of the paper was incorrect as the total sales consideration did not match to the sales consideration as per the agreement. Further, the sales consideration as per the loose paper did not even match to the handwritten jottings whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terial found on investigation and/or in the search. The document should be clear and unambiguous in respect of all four components of charge of tax. If it is not so, the document is only a dumb document and no charge of tax can be levied on the assessee on the basis of a dumb document." Further it has been held that in absence of any supportive and corroborative material and evidence, a loose paper found during search containing rough notings of proposals/offers could not be a basis for making addition u/s 69 of the Act. 16. It is further observed that the Ld. AO did not consider the need to summon the seller or the person searched, or to record the statement of the author/searched person/seller by giving an opportunity to assessee to cros ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
