O.P. Kant ORDER
O.P. Kant, Member (A)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 01/01/2016 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Muzaffarnagar [in short 'the Ld. CIT(A)'] for assessment year, 2009-10 raising following grounds:
1. Because, notice issued u/s. 148 of Act is beyond jurisdiction being without any 'reason to believe' and 'satisfaction' of AO or of the superior authority who accorded approval in a mechanical manner, in as much as, that same is merely on the basis of AIR information to conduct roving enquiries and hence subsequent proceedings are void-ab-initio and consequent order illegal.
2. Because, without prejudice to above and as an alternative learned commissioner of income tax erred, in sustaining the addition of Rs. 18.59 lakhs made u/s. 68 of the Act, being the amount deposited in the bank ignoring the fact that provisions of s. 68 are not applicable to assessee and addition is against the said provision of law.
3. Because, learned commissioner of income tax also erred, in sustaining the said addition despite admitting that statement relied for the same is recorded behind the back of assessee even after admitting that the said witness not produced for cross-examination and he further erred in appreciating the sequence of events and rule of preponderance of probability, hence order is perverse.
Therefore, in terms of above grounds, it is hereby prayed that the notice u/s. 148 and assessment framed may kindly be quashed though only as an a relative it is also prayed that the additions of Rs. 18,59,000/- may kindly be quashed."
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessee, an individual, was engaged in agricultural activity during the relevant year. In the case of the assessee, an information was received through annual information return (AIR) that the assessee had deposited ` 23,59,000/- in his saving bank account maintained with the Punjab National Bank, Shamli (Uttar Pradesh). On being asked by the Assessing Officer, the assessee submitted explanation of source of deposit, however, the AO was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee. In view of the information, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on 18/01/2013. The assessee filed return of income on 20/11/2013, declaring agriculture income of ` 66,000 and interest income of ` 10,361/- along with copy of receipt of advance of ` 25 lakh and copy agreement to sale of land. After filing return of income, the assessee was provided reasons recorded for issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. The objections filed by the assessee against the reasons recorded were also addressed by the Assessing Officer. The assessment under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 31/03/2014, after making addition of ` 20 lakh. The Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order upheld the addition to the extent of ` 18.59 lakhs. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the grounds as reproduced above.
3. Before us, the Learned Counsel of the assessee submitted orally that ground No. 1 of the appeal may be admitted as additional ground raised by the assessee. According to him this ground being legal in nature and no inv........