PRATIME HIREN VORA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(4), AHMEDABAD

We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties, and we have also perused the relevant materials available on record.

The brief facts leading to the case is this that a search was conducted under Section 132 of the Act on 25.02.2016 in the various premises of J. P. Iscon Group and related assessees wherein incriminating documents/materials related to the assessee has been claimed to have been seized in respect of “on-

The case was re-opened under Section 147 of the Act on the basis of such information available to the AO and notice under Section 148 was issued and served on the assessee on 30.03.2018. The case of the assessee before the AO is this that the investment for purchasing of the said flat made by assessee’s husband where his name was shown on the documents as first buyer and the name of the assessee was kept as a second buyer for the convenience of transfer in case of any unforeseen event. However, this particular aspect of the matter has not been considered by the Ld. AO and the re-assessment was finalized upon making addition of Rs. 22,28,000/- as unaccounted investment as on-money which has not been offered for taxation by the assessee. The assessment was completed with a finding that the assessee had advanced/paid cash as “on-money” for booking/purchase against the unit No. G-604, in Tower-G, 3 BHK, Iscon Platinum, Ahmedabad as per planned (2) of Rs. 22,28,000/- and as per planned (1) cheque of Rs. 51,98,250/- mentioned in the Excel Sheet seized during the search. Such addition was confirmed by the First Appellate Authority. Hence, the instant appeal before us.

However, it appears from the said set of documents that the assessee filed a written notes of submission before the Department for faceless assessment which is also appearing at Page 2 to 6 of the order dated 16.11.2021 as impugned before us. When the purchase had been made by the assessee’s husband the addition in the hands of the assessee is unjustified and unwarranted on facts and is not sustainable in law as the case made out by the assessee throughout the proceeding. However, as it appears from the records

Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we find it fit and proper to remit the issue to the file of the Ld. AO to consider the issue afresh and to pass a reasoned order in the light of the observation made above upon giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering evidence which the assessee may choose to filed at the time of hearing of the matter. Assessee’s appeal is, thus, allowed for statistical purpose.