M/S AKHILESH MISHRA,SILIGURI vs. ITO, WD-1(1), SILIGURI, SILIGURI

For the Appellant: Ms. Varsha Jalan, Advocate For the Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR ORDER This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A), Siliguri vide Appeal No. 19/CIT(A)/SLG/2014-15 dated 03.09.2015. Assessment was framed by ITO, Wd-1(1), Siliguri u/s. 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2011-12 vide his order dated 26.02.2015.

2 Akhilesh Mishra, AY 2011-12 Subsequently, a survey was conducted on the business premises of the assessee u/s. 133A of the Act on 06.03.2013 from where a document of payment as mentioned above is found and marked as WM/01. Accordingly, the AO required the assessee to explain the payment of Rs. 6 lacs pertaining to FY 2010-11 relevant to AY 2011-12 (under consideration). Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that no opportunity to cross examine Shri Pravesh Goyal, whose receipt of Rs. 6 lacs was found during the course of survey was allowed to the assessee. She also referred to the order of CIT(A) para 5 wherein specifically the assessee has required to cross examine Shri Pravesh Goyal and the relevant para 5 reads as under: “The Ld. AR in his submission has heavily emphasized on two points – (i) that in the first statement before the DDIT (Inv.), Siliguri, appellant had categorically denied to have made any payment in the FY 2010-11 and (ii) that entries in the books of the third party does not constitute any material evidence to punish the appellant, especially when the appellant was not allowed to cross examine that third party namely, Shri Pravesh Kumar Goyal.”