Appeal stands dismissed as Bharat Bhushan Handa wishes to settle the dispute through Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Last updated: 20 January 2021

Court :
ITAT New Delhi

Brief :
This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 29.09.2017 for Assessment Year 2014-15. Grounds taken in this appeal of Assessee are as under:

Citation :
ITA No:- 7118/Del/2017

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(DELHI BENCH: ‘A’: NEW DELHI)
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)

BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No:- 7118/Del/2017
(Assessment Year: 2014-15)

Mr. Bharat Bhushan Handa,
Delhi.
APPELLANT

Vs.

ACIT, Circle-49(1),
New Delhi.
RESPONDENT
PAN No: ABMPH2834G

Assessee By : Shri Darbara Singh, CA
Revenue By : Shri Prakash Duby, Sr. DR

Per Anadee Nath Misshra, AM

(A) This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, New Delhi, [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 29.09.2017 for Assessment Year 2014-15. Grounds taken in this appeal of Assessee are as under:

“1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [hereinafter referred to as “C.I.T. (Appeals)”] erred in upholding the action of theAssessing Officer, (hereinafter referred to as “A.O.”) by addition unsecured loans of Rs. 3,50,00,000/- as income of the Assessee, in disregard to the law on the subject and the facts of the case.

2. The Ld. C.I.T. (Appeals) erred in holding that the burden of proof lay on the Appellant despite the fact the Appellant had discharged the initial burden of establishing the genuineness of the transaction.

3. The CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition without any material evidence to that effect being on record.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or omit any of the above grounds of Appeal as the circumstances may warrant.”

To know more in details find the attachment file