SMT. G. HEMALATHA, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CC-1(3), CHENNAI

ITA 3152/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8669 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 15-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure; Document seized; Principle of natural justice; Opportunity of cross examination; Third party statement; Tax effect; Documents seized; Set aside; Capital Gains
• Section: 50C; 201; 13; 22; 20

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , , BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA , ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER ./ I . T . A NO. 3152 /CHNY/201 9 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 5 - 20 1 6 SMT. G. HEMALATHA, NO.118/119, JAINS ANUSHIKA APARTMENT, FC FLAT, KAMARAJAR AVENUE, 2 ND STREET, ADYAR,CHENNAI 600 020. [PAN: AHPPH 1927B ] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1( 3 ), CHENNAI 600 034. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. R. SIVARAMAN , ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : M R . ABANI KANTA NAYAK , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 12.07 .2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22. 0 7 .2021 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , (APPEALS) - 1 8 I N I.T.A. NO. 3 88 / 18 - 19 DATED 31.10. 201 9 RELE VANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 5 - 201 6 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS AS UNDER: 1) THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS CONTRARY TO THE LAW, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 2 - : 2) FOR THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ERRED IN UPLOADING THE ADDITION OF RS.34,73,87,000/ - AS INCOME OF THE APPELLANT THOUGH THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) PARTIALLY GAVE RELIEF BY TREATING THE SAID ADDITION AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS INSTEAD OF INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AS DISCUSSED IN THE ASSESSMENT (TAX EFFECT: 7,87,17,894/0). 3) FOR THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT TH E SAID ADDITION OF RS.34,73,87,000/ - WAS MADE BASED ON THIRD PARTY STATEMENT WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINATION. 4) FOR THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE SWORN STATEMENTS RELIED UPON THE A SSESSMENT NOWHERE STATED THAT THE SAID PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO THE APPELLANT. 5) FOR THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S.234B OF THE ACT. 6) FOR THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S.234C OF THE ACT. FOR THESE GROUNDS AND SUCH OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE ADDUCED BEFORE OR DURING THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL , I T IS PRAYED THAT THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL MAY BE PLEASED TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.34, 73,87,000/ - AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS AND / OR PASS SUCH OTHER ORDE R S AS THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL MAY DEEM FIT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 2016 ON 24 TH JUNE, 2017 ADMITTING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.4,51,18,970/ - . SUBSEQUENTLY, A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED IN M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED GROUP OF CASES ON 18.10.2016. AS A PART OF THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION WITH A WARRANT IN THE NAME OF M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED, THE I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 3 - : OFFICE PREMISES AT NO.15, NAGESWARA RAO ROAD , T. NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 017 WAS COVERED. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH AT THE ABOVE PREMISES, PRINTOUTS OF CASH LEDGER MAINTAINED IN A PEN - DRIVE W AS TAKEN OUT AND W AS SEIZED FROM WHICH IT WAS SE EN THAT SHRI. K.V.P. SADAYANDI AND OTHERS HAD PAID AN AMOUNT OF RS.34,73,87,000/ - AS ON - MONEY TO SMT.G. HEMALATHA IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY. SINCE THE SEIZED MATERIAL HAD BEARING ON TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, AFTER RECORDING SATISFACT ION NOTE, THE SAME WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE ASSESSEE. PURSUANT TO THE TRANSFER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ISSUED A NOTICE U/S.153C DATED 19.09.2019 TO THE ASSESSEE AND IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED, THE ASSE SSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 13.11.2008 ADMITTING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.4,51,18,970/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FOUND FROM THE SEIZED MATERIAL THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD AN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY FOR A CONSIDERATION RS.28,00,00,000/ - TO SHRI. K.V.P. SAD AYANDI AND OTHERS VIDE SALE DEED NUMBERS 9676 DATED 20.11.2014 DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2014 2015 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 2016. FURTHER, THE A SSESSING OFFICER HAS SEEN FROM THE SEIZED DOCUMENT AT PAGE NOS.514 TO 516 OF ANN/SP/PPL/LS/S - 2 AND PAGE NO.69 OF ANN/SP/PPL/LS/S - 7 THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.34,73,87,000/ - HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM SHRI. K.V.P. SADAYANDI AND OTHERS IN CASH , OVER AND ABOVE THE CONSIDERATION MENTIONED IN THE SALE DEED. I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 4 - : THE DETAILS OF THE SAME ARE MENTIONED AS UNDER: 07/19/ 2014 AL CPNN/000382 CASH CHROMPET PAYMENT 50,00,000 07.27.2014 AL CPNN/000430 CASH CROMPET PROP. SADAYANDI 50,00,000 09.22.2014 AL CPNN /000695 CASH CHROMPET PAYMENT 3,00,00,000 11.16.2014 AL CPNO/000986 CASH CHROMPET - OM PRAKASH 6,00,000 11.17.201 4 AL CPNO/000991 CASH CHROMPET 16.11.2014 5,00,00,000 11.19.2014 AL CPNO/000996 CASH CHROMPET 16.11.2014 5,00,00,000 11.22.2014 AL CPNO/001028 CASH CHROMPET PROPERTY 4,00,00,000 11.30.2014 AL CPNO/001068 CASH CHROMPET REGISTRATION EXPS - 20.11.2014 PURSOTHAMAN 2,87,000 12.16.2014 AL CPNO/001113 CASH CHROMPET SADAYANDI THRO SR. 1,50,00,000 01.14.2015 AL CPNO/001271 CASH PROPERTY A/C. CHROMPET 2,50,00,000 02.08.2015 AL CPNO/001393 CASH CHROMPET 08.02.2015 2,00,00,000 02.23.2015 AL CPNO/00 1463 CASH CHROMPET 3,00,00,000 03.06.2015 AL CPNO/001517 CASH CHROMPET 10,00,000 03.12.2015 AL CPNO/001543 CASH CHROMPET PAYMENT G. HEMALATHA 2,00,00,000 03.19.2015 AL CLNO/001570 CASH CHROMPET PROPERTY 1,00,00,000 07.04.2015 AL/CPNO/000020 CASH CHROMPET PROPERTY 2,00,00,000 09.04.2015 AL CPNO/000035 CASH CHROMPET PROPERTY ACCOUNT 1,00,00,000 28.04.20 - 15 CASH CHROMPET PROPERTY 1,00,00,000 22.07.2015 AL CPNO/000519 CASH CHROMPET PAYMENT 5,00,00,000 TOTAL 34,73,87,000 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HA D ISSUED A SHOW - CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE AMOUNT OF RS.34,73,87,000/ - WAS I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 5 - : RECEIVED OVER AND ABOVE THE SALE CONSIDERATION WHICH SHOULD NOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX AS ON - MONEY AND AS TO WHY THE AMOUNT OF RS.7,27,75,182/ - SHOUL D NOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAD DENIED RECEIPT OF THE ON - MONEY BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HA D NOTED THAT IT IS A FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D SOLD THE PROPERTY TO M/S. POTHYS GROUP, I.E. SHRI. K.V.P. SADAYANDI AND OTHERS AND THEREFORE THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ARE DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THIS TRANSACTION. AS FAR AS THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ARE CONCERNED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NOTED THAT THEY WERE NOT M ER E LY A LOOSE SHEET WITH SCRIBBLING OVER IT. IT WAS A RUNNING ACCOUNT MAINTAINED AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE L IMITED. THESE ACCOUNTS WERE MAINTAINED BY ONE, SHRI S. BALASUBRAMANIAM, ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT WHO I S REPORTING TO MR . SULTAN MOHIDEEN, CHIEF ACCOUNTANT. FURTHER, MR. S. RAMESH HAD ADMITTED THAT THE AMOUNTS HA VE BEEN PAID AS ON - MONEY IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY PURCHASED FROM THE ASSESSEE IN H IS ANSWER TO THE QUESTION NO.40 OF HIS STATEMENT, RECORDED ON 19.10.2016 WITH REGARD TO THE PAGES 514 TO 516 OF ANN/SP/PPL/LS/S - 2, HAD ADMITTED THAT AN ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.44,95,37,490/ - FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 2016. A STATEMENT WAS ALSO RECORDED FROM SHRI S. BALASUBRAMANIAN, ACCOUNTS I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 6 - : ASSISTANT OF M/S. PO THYS PRIVATE LIMITED WHO REPORTS TO SHRI SULTAN MOHIDEEN ADMITTED THAT THE DATA FOUND DURING THE SEARCH RELATING TO CASH PAYMENT AND CASH RECEIPTS WAS ENTERED BY ME BASED ON THE DETAILS GIVEN BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, SHRI S. RAMESH. 6. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER BY CONSIDERING THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS THAT ARE MENTIONED IN THE AFORESAID PARAGRAPH NO.3 AND ALSO BY CONSIDERING THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY SHRI S. RAMESH, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ALSO THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY SHRI. S. BALASUBRAMAN IAN, ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT CAME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS.34,73,87,000/ - I N CASH , OVER AND ABOVE THE SALE CONSIDERATION IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. AS ON - MONEY IS BEING ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE AMOUNT OF RS .7,27,75,182/ - BEING THE EXCESS OF GUIDELINE VALUE OVER THE STAMP DUTY VALUE IS TELESCOPED AND NOT CONSIDERED FOR ADDITION. ACCORDINGLY, THE AMOUNT OF RS.34,73,87,000/ - WAS BROUGHT TO TAX IN THE HANDS OF THE A SSESSEE, (INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAINS). 7. ASSE SSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS BASED ON THE STATEMENT OF THE THIRD PARTIES. NO OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO CROSS - EXAMINE THE WITNESSES RESPONSIBL E FOR MAKING THE I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 7 - : ADDITION TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 2016. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE SEIZED DOCUMENT, NOWHERE IT IS MENTIONED THAT WHO HAS RECEIVED THE ON - MONEY PAID IN RESPECT OF THE CHROMPET PROPERTY. THE REFORE, ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE UNLESS IT IS FULLY ESTABLISHED THAT THE PAYMENT IS MADE TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE HAS HELD T HAT THE CASH PAYMENT HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO THE BUYER GROUP IN RELATION TO THE CHROMPET PROPERTY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DRAWN AN APPROPRIATE AND LEGALLY TENABLE INFERENCE BASED ON THE SYSTEMATIC AND CONTEMPORANEOUS RECORDING IN THE EXCEL SHEET THAT HAS BE EN MAINTAINED FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE BUYER GROUP. THE NARRATION CHROMPET - PROPERTY COULD NOT BY ANY STRETCH OF IMAGINATION BE SAID TO BE ACCIDENTAL OR INTENTIONAL . NO PRUDENT PERSON AND THAT TOO A BUSINESS ENTITY THAT HAS SUBSTAN TIAL HUGE FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS RELATING TO ITS TRADING AND INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES WOULD PICK A RANDOM LOCATION SUCH AS CHROMPET. IT IS ONLY REASONABLE THAT THE NARRATIONS ARE CONSTRUED AS RELATING TO THE IMPUGNED PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS, I.E. THE SALE OF P ROPERTY LOCATED AT NO.46, RANGASAMY STREET, ZAMEEN, PALLAVARAM, CHROMPET. I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 8 - : 9. HE HAS ALSO NOTED THAT THE BUYER HAS ADMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONAL AND UNACCOUNTED INCOME WAS IN HIS HANDS . IN SO FAR AS THE CROSS - EXAMINATION IS CONCERNED, THE LEARNED COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ASKED FOR CROSS EXAMINATION OF ALL THE PARTIES WHO GAVE THE STATEMENT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THEREFORE THE PLEA OF DENIAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE CANNOT BE PUT FORTH BEFORE THE LD . CIT(A) AND DISTINGUISHED THE CITATION OF ANDAMAN TIMBER INDUSTRIES VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [2016] 15 SCC 785. 10. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 11. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT A SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED AT M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED, GROUP CASE AND THEY SEIZED THE DOCUMENTS, WHEREIN PAYMENT IN CASH WAS PAID TO CHROMPET, AND NOWHERE THE ASSESSEES NAME WAS MENTIONED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT BASED ON THE SEIZED MATERIALS AND ALSO OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY SHRI S. RAMESH, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY AND SHRI S. BALASUBMRAMANIAN, ACCOUNT ASSISTANT, ADDITION WAS MADE AND NO CASH WAS SEIZED FROM THE ASSESSEE BUT ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE SEIZED MATERIAL, WITH REFERENCE TO CHR OMPET AND THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 9 - : MANAGING DIRECTOR AND THE ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT, THE ADDITION WAS MADE AND HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT ALLOWED TO CROSS - EXAMINE THE PARTIES WHO GAVE THE STATEMENT BEFORE HIM STATING THAT THE ON - MONEY WAS PAID AND THEREFORE IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IT IS A CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND RELIED UPON THE CITATION ANDAMAN TIMBER INDUSTRIES VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (SUPRA) A ND SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION CANNOT SURVIVE. HE ALTERNATIVELY SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CROSS - EXAMINE THE THIRD - PARTIES WHO MADE THE STATEMENT WITH REFERENCE TO THE ON - MONEY PAYMENT. 12. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SEIZED DOCUMENT CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT WHICH IS IN PAGE NO.3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER , THE PAYMENT OF ON - MONEY MADE IN DIFFERENT DATES, WHEREIN SPECIFICALLY MENT IONED CHROMPET / CHROMPET PROPERTY AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER EXAMINING ALL THE DETAILS, THE ADDITION WAS MADE. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED HAS ADMITTED THAT THE ON - MONEY WAS PAID AN D ADDITION AL INCOME WAS OFFERED FOR TAXATION. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS BASED ON THE INCRIMINATING MATERIALS AND I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 10 - : SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION HAS TO SURVIVE OR SUSTAIN. IN SO FAR AS THE CROSS - EXAMINATION IS CONCERNED, THE A SSESSEE H AS NOT ASKED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THEREFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) RIGHTLY OBSERVED THAT NO CROSS - EXAMINATION IS REQUIRED AND THAT HE ALSO DISTINGUISHED THE CASE - LAW RELIED BY THE ASSE S SEE IN THE CASE OF ANDAM AN TIMBER INDUSTRIES VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (SUPRA) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS PASS ED A DETAILED ORDER BY CONSIDERING ALL THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUES AND STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 13. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THERE WAS A SEARCH OPERATION CONDUCTED AT M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED ON 18.10.2016 AT THE OFFICE PREMISES AT NO.15, NAGESWARA RAO ROAD, T. NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 017. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH AT THE ABOVE PREMISES, PRINTOUTS OF CASH LEDGER MAINTAINED IN A PEN - DRIVE WAS TAKEN OUT AND WAS SEIZED FROM WHICH IT WAS SEEN THAT SHRI. K.V.P. SADAYANDI AND OTHERS HAD PAID AN AMOUNT OF RS.34,73,87,000/ - AS ON - MONEY TO SMT.G. HEMALATHA IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY. THE SEIZED MATERIAL THAT WAS REFERRED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN PAGE NO.3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE P AYMENTS WERE MADE IN I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 11 - : REFERENCE TO THE C HROMPET PROPERTY IN DIFFERENT DATES AND IN DIFFERENT AMOUNTS , (APPROXIMATELY ABOUT 20 TIMES). ONLY IN ONE TRANSACTION WHICH IS ON 03.12.2015, THE NAME OF SMT. G. HEMALATHA WAS MENTIONED AND IN ALL OTHER REMAINING TRA NSACTIONS, ONLY THE REFERENCE WAS MADE TO CHROMPET PROPERTY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS EXAMINED ONE MR. S. RAMESH, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED WHO HAS ADMITTED THAT ON - MONEY PAYMENT IN RESPECT OF THE CHROMPET PROPERTY WAS OFFERED FOR TAXATION ALONG WITH THE ADDITIONAL INCOME. IN HIS STATEMENT, NOWHERE HE HAS MENTIONED THAT PAYMENT WAS MADE TO SMT. G. HEMALATHA . THE STATEMENT OF MR. S. BALASUBRAMANIAN WHO IS THE ACCOUNTS A SSISTANT , WAS ALSO RECORDED AND HE ALSO STATED THAT THE ON - MONEY WAS PAID BUT NO REFERENCE TO SMT. G. HEMALATHA. THE ASSESSEE HAS DENIED RECEIPT OF THE ON - MONEY AND SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT SHE HAS RECEIVED THE SALE CONSIDERATION AS PER THE SALE DEED TO NEARLY ABOUT RS.28,00,00,000/ - . HOWEVER, THE A SSESSING OFFICER BY CONSIDERING THE SEIZED DOCUMENT AND ALSO THE STATEMENT S GIVEN BY MR. S. RAMESH, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED AND THE ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT , ADDITIONS WERE MADE. ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 1 4 . WE FIND THAT FROM THE SEIZED DOCUMENT, EXCEPT ONE TRANSACTION, NOWHERE THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE IS MENTIONED. I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 12 - : 14.1 MR. S. RAMESH, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. POTHYS PRIVATE LIMITED NOWHERE STATED THAT THE PAYMENT WAS MADE TO THE ASSESSEE AND ONLY SAID THAT ON - MONEY WAS PAID. FROM HIS STATEMENT, IT IS NOT CLEAR THAT THE ON - MONEY WAS PAID TO WHOM. EVEN THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY MR. S. BALASUBRAMANIAN, ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT WAS THAT THE ON - MONEY WAS PAID. HIS STATEMENT WAS ALSO NOT CLEAR THAT THE PAYMENT WAS MADE TO WHOM. 1 5 . UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO CROSS - EXAMINE ALL THE PARTIES , WHOSE STATEME NT WERE THE BASIS ON WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE ADDITIONS. IN THIS CONTEXT, THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ANDAMAN TIMBER INDUSTRIES VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (SUPRA) , WHEREIN THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD THAT FAILURE TO ALLOW TO CROSS - EXAMINE ALL THE WITNESSES WHOSE STATEMENT IS RELIED UPON IS A BREACH TO PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND REFERRED TO THE ORDER IN NULLITY . 1 6 . KEEPING IN VIEW THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ANDAMAN TIMBER INDUSTRIES VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (SUPRA), WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE ASSESSEE I . T . A NO . 3152 /CHNY/201 9 : - 13 - : FOR CROSS - EXAMINING ALL THE PARTIES AND PASS AN ORDER AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 1 7 . IN THE RES ULT, THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A . NO. 3152 /CHNY/201 9 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 22 ND JULY , 2021 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - ( ) ( G. MANJUNATHA) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - ( ) ( V. DURGA RAO ) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI, / DATED: 22 ND JULY , 2021 IA , SR. PS / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / CIT(A) 4. / CIT 5. / DR 6. / GF