Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. Ι.Τ.Α. No. 4157/Del/2011, ITO Vs. Sh. Pankaj Vij, Rohtak.. As pointed by the AR, mismatch with the figures in Form 26AS of ITD database itself can not be a ground to hold that there is understatement of receipts. It is trite in law that correct income has to be taxed in correct hands and in the correct year.

5. It is a well settled proposition that the income can be assessed in the hands of right person only. In the case of ITO vs. Ch. Atchaiah (1966) 218 ITR 239 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the AO can and he must, tax the right person and the right person alone. The 'right person' is meant to be the person who is liable to be taxed, according to law, with respect to a particular income. Accordingly we pray for relief now as since these differences in reconciliation is very much explainable. Merely based upon reporting in the form 26AS the addition to income cannot made. This addition for Rs. 7,72,29,746/- has made without any substantive evidence. Also learned Assessing Officer for non-explained the fact upon the case and without calling reconciliation of income and recording sufficient evidence on record, hence addition made by Assessing Officer, we pray before your goodself for deletion."