O.P. Kant ORDER
Bhavnesh Saini, Member (J)
1. This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-22, New Delhi, Dated 30.08.2018, for the A.Y. 2009-2010, challenging the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and addition of Rs. 1,05,00,000/- on account of purchase of property.
2. We have heard the Learned Representative of both the parties and perused the material available on record.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 38,82,621/- on 21.07.2009. In this case information was received from the O/o. DDIT (Inv.)-I, Faridabad through DCIT-1, Central Circle, Chandigarh that during the course of survey conducted on the above assessee as well as other Group Promoter of Lingaya Group Society on 30.06.2014/01.07.2014, various incriminating documents were found, examined and impounded. As per investigation reports received, Shri Pischeswar Gadde and Smt. Sunita Gadde [Assessee] had paid a consideration of Rs. 3.15 crores towards purchase cost of farm house bearing No. 1, Dera Mandi, Chhattarpur, New Delhi. The seller Smt. Jaya Sharma stated the fact on oath during the course of her deposition on 02.07.2014 under section 131 of the I.T. Act, 1961, that both have paid Rs. 3.15 crores towards purchase cost and out of the total amount of Rs. 3.15 crores, Rs. 2.10 crores were paid in cash and balance amount of Rs. 1.05 crores were paid through cheque. Smt. Jaya Sharma furnished a letter dated 03.07.2014 addressed to DDIT (Inv.) that she would pay taxes on that. Accordingly, reasons were recorded for reopening of the assessment and notice under section 148 was issued. The assessee filed letter before A.O. intimating that original return filed on 21.07.2009 may be treated as return having filed in response to notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act. The assessee filed objections to the reopening of the assessment before A.O. which have been rejected.
3.1. During the course of assessment proceedings, assessee was asked to provide complete details of sale/purchase of the properties along with documentary evidences and source of investment. The assessee has stated that she had purchased the property for Rs. 1.05 crores and has not paid any other amount for purchase of this agricultural land of Village Dera Mandi, Chhattarpur, New Delhi. The A.O. did not accept the contention of assessee in view of statement recorded of Smt. Jaya Sharma on 02.07.2014 under section 131 of the I.T. Act that assessee and her husband have paid cash to her. The A.O. also noted that husband of the assessee Shri Picheswar Gadde who is also co-owner of 50% share in the property in his statement recorded during the course of survey admitted that he has sold the property to M/s. Mapple Destination Dreambuilt P. Ltd., for an amount of Rs. 6.61 crores, out of which, part amount was paid through cash and part was paid through cheque and admitted to pay taxes thereon. The A.O. also noted that Shri Rakesh Sejwal, Manager of Lingaya's Society who was assigned the work of record keeping of various transactions of properties carried out by Lingaya's Group of Society or by husband of the assessee and assessee, has confirmed the collecting cash of Rs. 5.41 crores on sale of property on behalf of assessee and her husband. The A.O. in view of the statement of the above persons, made addition of Rs. 1.05 crores in the hands of the assessee being one half share of the assessee in purchase of the property.
3.2. The assessee challenged the addition before the Ld. CIT(A) as well as reopening of the assessment. The assessee also contended before the Ld. CIT(A) that no right of cross-examination have been given to the statement........