Sh. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

CO 108/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6584 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 19-10-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR B R R KUMAR
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Income from undisclosed sources

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI H BENCH BEFORE SHRI A.D.JAIN, JM & SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, AM CO NO.108/DEL./2011 IN ITA NO.1306/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 DATE OF HEARING:15.7.11 DATE OF DRAFTING:20.7.11 VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL, J-83,EXTENSION,GURU RAMDASS NAGAR,LAXMI NAGAR,NEW DELHI V/S . DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 12,ROOM NO. 330,ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHII [PAN:A EXPA2040R ] (CROSS-OBJECTOR) .. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY :- SHRI RAJEEV SAXENA, AR REVENUE BY:- DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, DR DATE OF HEARING:- 28-10-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:- 28-10-2011 O R D E R A.N.PAHUJA:- THIS CROSS-OBJECTION[CO] BY THE ASSESSEE FILED ON 8.4.2011 AGAINST AN ORDER DATED 14.12.2010 OF THE LD. CIT (A PPEALS)-I, NEW DELHI, RAISES THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. LD. CIT(A WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT ADJUDICATIN G UPON GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE ON FACTS AND MERITS OF THE CA SE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN . THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING SUBMISSION S OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN NOT ADJUDICATING ON ADDITION OF RS. 59,300/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNEXPLAINED CASH, TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN . THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING SUBMISSION S OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN NOT ADJUDICATING ON ESTIMATED ADDIT ION OF RS.98,31,535/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON BAS IS OF SEIZED MATERIAL. CO NO.108/DEL/2011 PAGE 2 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN . THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING SUBMISSION S OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN NOT ADJUDICATING ON ADDITION OF RS. 20,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNEXPLAINED EXPEND ITURE, TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN . THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING SUBMISSION S OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN NOT ADJUDICATING ON ADDITION OF RS. 9,100/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE , TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN . THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING SUBMISSION S OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN NOT ADJUDICATING ON ADDITION OF RS. 48.75,007/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS 50% SHARES OF PROF IT FROM M/S HARYANA CHAINS, AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. ON THE FACTS AND IN . THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING SUBMISSION S OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN NOT ADJUDICATING ON ADDITION OF RS. 30,83,127/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS 50% VALUE OF JEWELLERY FOUND AS STOCK OF M/S HARYANA CHAINS, AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE.. 8. ON THE FACTS AND IN . THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING SUBMISSION S OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN NOT ADJUDICATING ON ADDITION OF RS. 2,89,500/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS DEPOSITS MADE IN BANK ACCOUNT ON VARIOUS DA TES. 9. YOUR APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, TO ALTER, AMEND OR FORGO ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF CROSS-OBJECTIONS, AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. WHEN THE CO WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT PER MISSION TO WITHDRAW THE CO. IT IS MENTIONED IN THE APPLICATION FILED O N 20.10.11 AND SIGNED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AFORESAID CROSS-OBJECTIONS WAS FILED ON 14.12.2 010 AFTER RECEIVING FORM NO. 36 FILED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BEARIN G ITA NO.1306/DEL./2011. IT IS HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THE AFORESAID CROSS OBJ ECTIONS WAS FILED BY ME DUE TO LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF LAW.DURING THE COUR SE OF HEARING BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL I WAS ADVISED BY LEGAL EXPERTS THA T AFTER THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN HOTEL BLUE MOON[321 ITR 36 2],IT HAS BECOME LAW OF LAND AND NO OTHER AUTHORITY IS ABOVE THAN TH E APEX COURT. MOREOVER, ON THE ASPECTS OF SECTION 292BB ALSO SPECIAL BENCH HAS ALREADY GIVEN CO NO.108/DEL/2011 PAGE 3 DECISION THAT IT WOULD BE APPLICABLE W.E.F 1.4.2008 I.E AY 2008- 09.RECENTLY,HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT HAVE CONFIRMED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MANI KAKKAR [18 DTR 145;178 TAXMAN 315] ,BY EXP RESSING THE AFORESAID VIEW. THUS, THERE IS NO PURPOSE OF AGITAT ING THE CROSS OBJECTIONS. I, THEREFORE, HUMBLY PRAY THAT MY CROSS OBJECTION M AY BE ALLOWED TO BE WITHDRAWN. IN THE ALTERNATIVE THE GROUNDS RAISED BE TREATED AS NOT PRESSED INCONVENIENCE CAUSED IN HIGHLY REGRETTED. 3. TO A QUERY BY THE BENCH, THE LD. DR DID NOT RAI SE ANY OBJECTION TO WITHDRAWAL OF THE CO. 4. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, CO IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT SD/- SD/- (A.D.JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A.N. PAHUJA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : THE ASSESSEE/ DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-12,ROOM NO. 330,A RA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION,NEW DELHI / THE CIT CONCERNE D/ CIT(APPEALS)-I, NEW DELHI / DR-H BENCH,NEW DELHI/ GUARD FILE BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF ITAT, NEW DELHI BENCH