PARASHMANI JAIN,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, COIMBATORE

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) –I, Coimbatore, dated 02.09.2014 and pertains to assessment year 2010-11.

Shri S. Sridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') to the extent of `19,95,000/- was confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) only on the ground that the assessee refused to avail the opportunity given by the Assessing Officer to cross-examine one Smt. Praveena Bhurat.

On the contrary, Shri A. Srinivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that inspite of providing sufficient opportunity, the assessee has not availed the same to cross- examine Smt. Praveena Bhurat. Therefore, based upon the statement recorded from Smt. Praveena Bhurat, the Assessing Officer made the addition, which was rightly confirmed by the CIT(Appeals).

We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The CIT(Appeals) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer on the ground that the opportunity given by the Assessing Officer to cross- examine Smt. Praveena Bhurat was not availed by the assessee. It is not in dispute that the copy of statement made by Smt. Praveena Bhurat was not furnished to the assessee. Unless a copy of statement recorded from Smt. Praveena Bhurat was furnished to the assessee, no one can expect the assessee to cross-examine Smt. Praveena Bhurat. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that a copy of statement said to be recorded from Smt.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.