- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) FOLLOWING questions are raised in the appeal : "Whether the IT authorities were right in computing the allegedly undisclosed investment of the assessee on the basis of the purported fair market value of the property in question ?" "Whether the purported undisclosed income found by the IT authorities was founded upon "sufficient material" in the hands of the Department and the Revenue had discharged the requisite burden before coming to a finding of undisclosed income ?" "Whether where the directors of a quasi-company i.e., private limited company are absolved of all liability under s. 158BC of the Act of 1961, the company can be burdened with liability in the same transaction under s. 158BD of the Act of 1961 ?" "Whether the order of the learned Tribunal upholding addition of "on money" paid in a transaction but remanding the matter for a hearing is bad being for contrary and futility ?" "Whether the invalidity of a notice under s. 158BD of the Act of 1961 is carable by a subsequent correction?" "Whether a body corporate only a juristic personality can have an income or undisclosed income without commencement of business ?" At the outset Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that basic issue is whether assessee has paid Rs. 34 lacs as `on money' or not or whether he has invested Rs. 34 lacs in addition to what has disclosed. He draws our attention at p. 8, where the Tribunal on the one hand states that finding in respect of Rs. 34 lacs paid as `on money' is not perverse and on the other hand, the matter has been remitted back to the AO to give opportunity to the assessee to explain whether he has paid Rs. 34 lacs as `on money' in the transactions and decide the same issue afresh. In our view, the Tribunal has committed mistake as on the one hand Tribunal states that finding regarding payment of Rs. 34 lacs as `on money' is not perverse and on the other hand, the Tribunal has remitted the matter back to the AO to give opportunity to the assessee to explain whether the `on money' of Rs. 34 lacs has been paid. Once the matter has been remitted back to the AO to decide the issue afresh regarding payment of `on money', there is no justification of confirming the finding of AO regarding payment of `on money' of Rs. 34 lacs. Before we go into the other issues, we would like to have a fresh finding on the issue whether assessee has paid Rs. 34 lacs as `on money'. Let there be a finding from AO in pursuance of the direction of the Tribunal. However, we make it clear that while deciding the issue afresh regarding addition of Rs. 34 lacs, the AO should not be influenced by any observation of the Tribunal or CIT in this regard. The other issues in the appeal will be considered, if necessary, after receipt of the fresh finding from the AO on the issue whether assessee has paid `on money' of Rs. 34 lacs or not.
(3.) THE AO is directed to give a fresh finding, on `on money', within 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.;