Singh) NCR Building Bhagwan A5, Transport Nagar, Jaipur Dass Road, C Scheme Ashok Nagar, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la@thvkbZvkj la@PAN/GIR No.: AEMPS7947E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Ronak Khandelwal (CA) & M/s Devendra Pareek & Co jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 09/09/2021 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 14/10/2021 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)2, Udaipur dated 27.02.2020 wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: "1. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)2, Udaipur, Rajasthan erred in passing an order dated 27th of February, 2020 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 partially allowing the appeal of the Appellant without considering the facts and grounds of appeal. 2 ITA No. 289/JP/2020 Late Sh. Satpal Singh Vs ACIT 2. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)2, Udaipur, Rajasthan erred in confirming the addition towards purchase of immoveable property of Rs. 1,65,53,295/ out of Rs. 1,97,50,500/ made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income Tax Act 1961 whereas the property was purchased by M/s. Seven Star Township Pvt. Ltd. 3. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)2, Udaipur, Rajasthan erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,65,53,295/ out of Rs. 1,97,50,500/ made by the Assessing Officer under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of incorrect facts and arbitrarily grounds. 4. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)2, Udaipur, Rajasthan erred in confirming the disallowance of claim of Long Term Capital Gain Rs. 93,34,545/ made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Act on the alleged ground that the transactions relating to Long Term Capital Gains on sale of shares of "Unisys Software & Holdings Industries Ltd" were dubious, suspicious and meant to book Long Term Capital Gain. 5. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)2, Udaipur, Rajasthan erred in confirming the aforesaid disallowance of Rs. 93,34,545/ made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained cash credit after disallowing the claim of the assessee of exemption of Rs 93,34,545/ under section 10(38) on the alleged ground that the transactions resulting in Long Term Capital Gain were the result of accommodation entries. 6. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)2, Udaipur, Rajasthan erred in agreeing with the aforesaid addition of Rs. 93,34,545/ made by the Assessing Officer solely relying on the report of the Investigation Wing, Kolkata and the statements of third parties recorded by them in some other cases without furnishing the copy thereof and without allowing any opportunity of crossexamination of the Assessee and without conducting any independent inquiry himself. 3 ITA No. 289/JP/2020 Late Sh. Satpal Singh Vs ACIT 7. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)2, Udaipur, Rajasthan erred in arbitrarily confirming the aforesaid disallowance of Rs. 93,34,545/ and thereby consequentially denying the claim of the Assessee of Long Term Capital Gain of Rs. 93,34,545/ on mere surmises, suspicions, conjectures and irrelevant considerations.