Held that Rule 27 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963,supported the assessee’s case since the issue was inherently related to the ground taken by the assessee before the Commissioner (Appeals), who deleted the additions on the merits but decided the legal aspect against the assessee. The assessee can argue the issue in the absence of any appeal or cross-objection filed by the assessee. Merely on the basis of statement in the course of survey addition cannot be made.Tribunal also held that the Assessing Officer cannot ignore the registered document. Transaction pertaining to eight years prior to assessment year no addition can be made. Marriage expenses of son is recorded in books of assessee’s wife’s proprietary concern hence the deletion is affirmed. CIT(A) is justified in giving telescoping benefits to additional income and undisclosed outgoings.(AY.2017-18)
ACIT v. Naresh Jain (2024)116 ITR 307 (Jaipur)(Trib)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments-Appellate Tribunal-Cross appeal or cross objection-Right of assessee to support order on issue decided against him-Survey-Statement has no evidentiary value-Source of payment-Assessing Officer cannot ignore the registered document-Transaction pertaining to eight years prior to assessment year-Addition is deleted-Marriage expenses of son-expenditure recorded in books of assessee’s wife’s proprietary concern-Deletion is affirmed-Telescoping benefits to additional income and undisclosed outgoings. [S. 69C 131, 133A (3)(iii), 254(1), ITAT R. 27]