JAGDISHBHAI R. PATEL Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
LAWS(IT)-2014-5-1
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on May 30,2014

Jagdishbhai R. Patel Appellant
VERSUS
INCOME TAX OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

D.K.TYAGI,J. - (1.) THIS is the assessee's appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Gandhinagar dated 30 -08 -2010.
(2.) THE assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: - "1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is against law equity and justice and same is wholly illegal, unlawful and bad in law. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and/or facts upholding the order of the ld. A.O. in considering unexplained investment in house propriety thus upholding addition of Rs. 478750/ - u/s. 69 of the Act."
(3.) AT the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite the that fact that notice for today's hearing was sent to him. No application for adjournment was also filed by the assessee. So, we proceeded to decide the appeal after hearing ld. DR. Brief facts of the case are that assessee's case was re -opened on the basis of statement of builder recorded in the course of search conducted on 27 -03 -92 at the premises of M/s. Desai Brothers and Associates. The notice u/s. 148 was issued to examine the chargeability of income of Rs. 14,60,000/ - (inclusive of on money of Rs. 4,78,750/ -) towards Bungalow No. 11, Tulip Bungalows Scheme. In the original order, the AO has noted that the builder had admitted of receiving 60% payment by cheque as official payment and 40% payment in cash as 'on money' towards the cost of Bungalow in Tulip -I and II scheme. The assessee has purchased Bungalow in assessment year 1994 -95 and paid the cost of Bungalow in the same year. But it was booked before conducting the search on builder as evident from incriminating document seized from builder. Accordingly, as per AO assessee has paid Rs. 9,81,250/ - by cheque as shown in the return of income for assessment year 1994 -95 and Rs. 4,78,750/ - as "on money" @ 40% of cost by Bungalow of Rs. 14,60,000/ -. On assessee's request summons dated 16 -01 -2001 was issued to assessee as well as the builder for cross examination. Neither of them attended the office on the date given in the notice/summon. Therefore, the AO held that the builder had nothing to say in addition to hisstatement recorded during the course of search. However, the assessee filed a letter dated 20 -01 -2001 for providing the copy of statement of Desai Brothers and Associates regarding on money. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AR of the assessee was specifically shown the statement recorded of the builder and also shown the copy of letter pad of Ambica Cotton Company seized during the search, in which the Bungalow -wise cost was mentioned by the builder. The cost of Bungalow No. 11 was shown at Rs. 14,60,000/ -.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.