Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2024] 139 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8970 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
4 month(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
21-10-2024
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
A
Next Hearing Date
18-09-2024
Assessment Year
2017-2018
Appeal Filed On
22-05-2024
Judgement Text
" \n आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ \nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \nCHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH \n \nBEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & \nSHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER \n \nआयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 639/CHD/2024 \n Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2017-18 \n \nDaya Kishan Gill, \nHouse No.2739b, B Block, \nUrban Estate, \nJind 126102 \n \nVs. \n बनाम \n \nThe Principal \nCommissioner of \nIncome Tax, \nPanchkula \nèथायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AGDPG4634P \n \nअपीलाथȸ/ APPELLANT \n \nĤ×यथȸ/ \nREPSONDENT \n \n( PHYSICAL HERING ) \n \n \n \n \n \nǓनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate \n \n \n \n \n \nShri Ashok Goyal, CA \nराजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR \n \nसुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing \n \n: \n18.09.2024 \nउदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement \n: \n 21.10.2024 \n \n \nआदेश/Order \n \nPer Krinwant Sahay, A.M.: \n \nThe appeal in this case has been filed by the Assessee against \nthe order dated 31.03.2024 of the ld. Principal Commissioner of \nIncome Tax, Panchkula (herein referred to as ‘PCIT’) u/s 263 of the \nIncome Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). \n\n639-Chd-2024 – \nDaya Kishan Gill, Jind \n \n2 \n \n \n \n2. \nGrounds of appeal taken by the Assessee are as under: - \n1. \nThat the Ld. CIT has erred in concluding \nproceedings under Section 263 of the Income \nTax Act, 1961 without proper perusal of \nAssessment record. \n \n2. \nThat based on the facts and circumstances of \nthe case and in law, the Ld. CIT has exceeded \nlegislative jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income \nTax Act,1.961 thus the order passed by the Ld. \nCIT is bad in the eyes of the law. \n \n3. \nThat the Ld. CIT has erred in substituting an \nalternative view as against the firm view \nadopted by the Ld. AO at the time of original \nassessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, \n1961. \n \n4. \nThat the Ld. CIT has erred in passing an order \nunder Section 263 of the Act in the absence of \nany erroneous position prejudicial to the \ninterest by revenue, in the original assessment \norder passed by Ld. ITO under Section 143(3) \nof the Act. \n \n5. \nThat the Appellant craves leave to add or \namend the grounds of appeal before the appeal \nis finally heard or disposed off. \n \n \n \n3. \nBrief facts of the case, as enumerated by the ld. Counsel in his \nsubmissions, are as under: \n \n\n639-Chd-2024 – \nDaya Kishan Gill, Jind \n \n3 \n \n \n1. \nThis is the case of an individual relating to A.Y. 2017-\n18. The Assessee has filed his Income Tax Return of \nincome for the subject year on 27.03.2018 u/s 139(4) \ndeclaring an income of Rs. 3,41,100/- besides \nagriculture income of Rs. 26,85,800/-. For the subject \nyear, the Assessee's case was selected for scrutiny \nunder CASS. \n \n2. \nSubsequently, During the course of assessment \nproceeding under Section 143(3) of The Income Tax \nAct, statutory notice u/s 143(2) of The Act was issued \non 24.09.2018. Also, notice u/s 142(1) of The Act \nalong with a detailed questionnaire were available on \nthe portal under the tab e-proceedings on 20.09.2019 \nfixing the case for hearing on 30.09.2019. \n \n3. \nIn response thereto, the Assessee filed his written \nsubmissions and evidence along with replies to \nvarious queries as called for by the Assessing Officer \nin the questionnaire dated 20.09.2019 which have \nbeen duly verified and examined by the AO. \n \n4. \nThe AO after considering the replies and information \nsubmitted by the Assessee accepted the returned \nincome of Rs. 3,41,100/- along with Agricultural \nincome \nof \nRs. \n26,85,800/-, \nvide \norder \ndated \n27.12.2019. \n \n\n639-Chd-2024 – \nDaya Kishan Gill, Jind \n \n4 \n \n \n \n \n5. \nThereafter, a show cause notice u/s 263 of The Act \nwas issued to the Assessee vide letter dated \n25.01.2022 wherein the Assessee was requested to \nshow cause as to why the Assessment order passed \nby the AO should not be cancelled by invoking the \nprovisions of section 263 of the Act. \n \n6. \nThe main contention as per the notice of the ld. \nPrincipal Commissioner of Income Tax was regarding \nthe claim of substantially higher agricultural income \nand the substantial amount of cash deposited in his \nKarnataka Bank during demonetization. The Ld. Pr. \nCIT in his notice conceded the fact that, \"the \nAssessing Officer had failed to conduct the basic \nenquiries in order to ascertain the veracity of \nAssessee's explanation regarding the sources of cash \ndeposited in his account with Karnataka Bank and \nregarding \nthe \nclaim \nof \nsubstantially \nhigher \nagricultural income.\" \n \n7. \n Subsequently, the Assessee was allowed a final \nopportunity \nof \nbeing \nheard \nvide \nletter \ndated \n03.02.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 10.02.2022 \nwith a request to the Assessee to make written as well \nas verbal submissions but the Assessee was unable to \nrespond to the said notices as he was not in the best \nof his health during that time. Thereafter, the order \n\n639-Chd-2024 – \nDaya Kishan Gill, Jind \n \n5 \n \n \nu/s 263 dated 14.02.2022 was passed on the basis of \ninformation available on the relevant Assessment \nrecords. \n \n8. That the ld. Pr. CIT vide order dated 14.02.2022 made \nan observation that the AO has completed the \nAssessment \"in a haste without conducting any \nenquiries\", the AO has simply accepted the claims of \nthe assessee without conducting any enquiries. Thus, \nthe sources of cash deposits amounting to Rs. \n23,86,000/- and agricultural income amounting to \nRs. 26,85,800/- declared by the Assessee remained \ntotally unexplained, and further made an observation \nthat the AO was found to have not verified the facts \nmentioned in the order u/s 263 of The Act, which \nwere prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. \n \n9. \n The Ld. Pr. CIT concluded that the this was a case fit \nfor revision u/s 263 of The Act as the assessment \nframed by the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to \nthe interest of the revenue and accordingly the said \norder 1 to be set aside and directing the AO to frame \nthe assessment afresh, with the directions to make \nrequisite inquiries and proper verifications with \nregard to the issues mentioned in the order u/s 263 \nand affording reasonable opportunity of being heard \nto the assessee. \n\n639-Chd-2024 – \nDaya Kishan Gill, Jind \n \n6 \n \n \n4. \nDuring the proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel for the \nAssessee has filed all the papers that were filed before the Assessing \nOfficer during the assessment proceedings and before the ld. PCIT \nduring the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act. \n5. \nAt the very outset, the ld. DR brought it to the notice of the \nBench that the ld. PCIT had passed the order u/s 263 on only two \nissues:- \n1. \n Deposit in the Karnataka Bank \n2. \nDetails \nof \nland \nfrom \nwhich \nthe \nAssessee \nearned \n \nagricultural income \n \n \nAccordingly, the Bench directed the Counsel of the Assessee to \nproduce the documents supporting his position on these two issues. \nThe ld. Counsel for the Assessee produced a copy of the bank account \nof Karnataka Bank, which he claimed was also produced before the \nauthorities below but somehow it was not discussed in detail there. \n6. \nRegarding agricultural income, the Assessee had claimed that it \nhad got share in the Friends Agricultural Farms which was owned over \n600 acres of land. The ld. Counsel submitted that the Assessee had \nfour acres of agricultural land of its own at Dsitrict Jind, Haryana. \nBesides, it was a partner in an agricultural firm called Friends \n\n639-Chd-2024 – \nDaya Kishan Gill, Jind \n \n7 \n \n \nAgricultural Farms in which the Assessee had share of 145.68 acres of \nland in Friends Agricultural Farms, Roopnagar, Punjab. \n7. \nDuring the proceedings before us, the ld. DR argued and relied \non the findings given by the ld. PCIT. The ld. DR summitted that the \nAssessee has not filed papers regarding land owing before the PCIT. In \nresponse to these arguments of the DR, the Assessee filed documents \nregarding ownership of around 563 acres of land that was in the \npossession of Friends Agricultural Farms wherein, the Assessee was a \npartner having a share of 24%. A copy of such documents were given \nto D.R. also. \n8. \nWe have considered the findings given by the ld. PCIT and the \nargument given by the ld. DR. In fact, the ld. DR has relied on the \norder of the PCIT . We find that the ld. PCIT has passed the order for \nverification on mainly two issues: - \ni) \nRegarding deposits made by the Assessee in Karnataka \n \nBank account; and \nii) \nRegarding agricultural income shown in the return of \n \nincome. \n9. \nDuring proceedings before us, the Counsel of the Assessee has \nclaimed that on both these issues details / papers were filed before the \nAssessing Officer during the assessment proceedings and before ld. \n\n639-Chd-2024 – \nDaya Kishan Gill, Jind \n \n8 \n \n \nPCIT during 263 proceedings. However, the same details regarding the \ndeposits in the bank account in Karnataka Bank as well as papers \nregarding ownership of land possessed by the Assessee in Friends \nAgricultural Farms, in which the Assessee was a partner having share \nof 24%. We find that on both the issues on which the ld. PCIT has \npassed the order u/s 263 have been duly explained by the Assessee \nbefore the authorities below. Therefore, ld. PCIT may not have a reason \nto again pass an order u/s 263 on these two issues. Accordingly, \nAssessee’s appeal against the issue of order u/s 263 is allowed. \n10. \nAppeal on other Grounds are general in nature. \n11. \nIn the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed. \nOrder pronounced on 21.10.2024. \n \n \n \n \nSd/- \n \n \n \n \n \nSd/- \n ( A. D. JAIN ) \n \n \n \n ( KRINWANT SAHAY) \n \nVice President \n \n \n \n \nAccountant Member \n“आर.क\nे.” \nआदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to : \n1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant \n2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent \n3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT \n4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, \nCHANDIGARH \n5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File \n\n639-Chd-2024 – \nDaya Kishan Gill, Jind \n \n9 \n \n \nआदेशानुसार/ By order, \nसहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n"
Mehul