| COURT: | ITAT Mumbai, Mumbai |
| CORAM: | Amit Shukla (JM), Rajesh Kumar (AM) |
| SECTION(S): | 68 |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | 68, Loans, strictures |
| COUNSEL: | R. K. Bothra |
| DATE: | March 15, 2016 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | March 31, 2016 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2007-08 |
| FILE: | Click here to download the file in pdf format |
| CITATION: | |
| AO framed the assessment in a hypothetical way putting the assessee to enormous harassment and inconvenience . Similarly, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition without looking into the merits and facts of the cases which are very clear and apparent from the records produced. | |
We have considered the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available before us. We have also perused various certificates and bank statements which were brought to our notice during the course of hearing from page no 13 to 42 of the paper book. As discussed above we find it is a classical case where various additions have been made by the AO without proper application of mind and has no distant connection with the material on record. We find that the third party transactions were added in the hands of the assessee without without any basis or material and thus, the AO framed the assessment in a hypothetical way putting the assessee to enormous harassment and inconvenience. Similarly, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition without looking into the merits and facts of the cases which are very clear and apparent from the records produced. Therefore, in view of these facts, the additions of Rs.1,40,43,154/- in Ground No.1, Rs.10 lakhs in ground no 2 and Rs.26 lakhs in ground No.3 on account of unexplained/undisclosed income are ordered to be deleted by reversing the order of First Appellate Authority. AO is directed accordingly.
Leave a Reply