ITO, W-1, Malerkotla V. Sh. Karam Pal Singh, Malerkotla

ITA 1184/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6633 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANDEEP SINGH NARIKA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Additional evidence
• Section: 147; 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1184/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 2009-10 THE ITO, VS. SHRI KARAMPAL SINGH WARD-1, S/O SHRI GULAB CHAND SINGH MALERKOTLA. VILLAGE, BUNGA, TEHSIL-MALERKOTLA. PAN : DLFPS6483A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT.CHANDER KANTA, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANDEEP SINGH NARIKA DATE OF HEARING : 01.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.11.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 19.05.2017 OF CIT(A) LUDH IANA PERTAINING TO 2009-10 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. WHETHER IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE FACT OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)-2. LUDHIANA WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 18,00,000 7- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT U/S 69 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961? 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT BASED ON THE AIR INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED IN CASH A SUM OF RS. 50 LACS IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT WITH HDFC BANK, MALERKOTLA, PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 WERE INITIATED AFTER RECORDING OF REASONS. THE ASSESSEE IN THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS, FILED COPY OF THE SALE DEED OF SALE OF AGRICULTUR AL LAND ON 24.09.2008 AMOUNTING TO RS. 32 LACS. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAID AMOUNT WAS HELD TO BE HAVING BEEN EXPLAINED. IN REGARD TO THE BALAN CE DEPOSIT OF RS. 18 LACS, VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES WERE PROVIDED TO THE ASSES SEE. SINCE HE FAILED TO AVAIL OF THE OPPORTUNITIES, ADDITION OF THE SAID AMOU NT WAS MADE BY AN ORDER DATED 16.03.2015 PASSED U/S 144/147 OF THE ACT. 3. IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE ASS ESSEE FILED FRESH EVIDENCE ALONGWITH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON 20.04.2016. THE CONTENTS OF THE SAME ARE REPRODUCED AT PAGES 3-4 OF T HE IMPUGNED ORDER A PERUSAL OF THE SAME SHOWS THAT IT WAS PLEADED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE ITA-1184/CHD//2017 A.Y 2009-10 PAGE 2 O F 2 THAT HE IS DOING LABOUR JOB FOR SUPPORTING HIS FAMILY AND DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, HE WAS HABITUAL TO DRINKING RIGHT FROM MORNING ON ACCOUNT OF FINANCIAL CRISIS AND ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF THE M ORAL SUPPORT FROM HIS FAMILY, HE WAS ABLE TO COME OUT OF THE DEPRESSION. HOWEVER, HE OWNED NO LAND, ACCORDINGLY, HE COULD RELY ONLY ON LABOUR JOB TO SURV IVE. 3.1 DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT IS EXPLAINED THAT SA LE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND ALONGWITH HIS NEPHEW WAS EXPLAINED AND HIS MOTHER DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE CASE PROCEEDINGS AND ONLY THEREAFT ER ON DISCUSSION, IT WAS REALIZED THAT RS. 20 LACS HAD BEEN TAKEN BY HIM FROM HIS MOTHER AND HAD SOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND AT VILLAGE BUNGA. SAID MONEY HAD B EEN ENTRUSTED TO HIM BY HIS MOTHER TO PURCHASE SOME JOINT AGRICULTURAL LAND BUT HE FAILED TO PURCHASE ANY LAND IN THE NAME OF HIS MOT HER, HIS NEPHEW AND HIMSELF ON ACCOUNT OF THE NEGLIGENCE AND DRINKING HABITS . IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS HIS PRAYER THAT THE FRESH EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM MAY BE CONSIDERED AND ACCEPTED. IT IS PLEADED THA T ASSESSEE WANTS TO SPEAK TRUTH AND EXCEPT THAT, HE HAS MADE A BIG BLUN DER BY RESORTING TO DRINKING RIGHT FROM EARLY MORNING, ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH, DUR ING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, HE COULD NOT REPRESENT HIS CASE . COPY OF THESE SUBMISSIONS WAS FORWARDED TO THE AO. ASSESSEE'S REPLY D ATED 20.01.2017 IS EXTRACTED IN PARA 4.3 OF THE ORDER. THE AO HAS NOT VE RIFIED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND ISSUED SUMMONS TO SMT. BEANT KAUR, MOTHER OF SHRI KARAMPAL SINGH, ASSESSEE. HER STATEMENT WAS RECORDED W HO ACCEPTS THAT SHE HAD RECEIVED PAYMENT OF RS. 35,53,500/- FROM SALE OF HER AGRICULTURAL LAND MEASURING 18 BIGHAS 15 BISWAS AT VILL. BUNGA. OUT OF TH IS AMOUNT, SHE STATED THAT SHE HAD PAID 20 LACS ON 24.09.2008 TO HER SON SH. KARAMPAL SINGH FOR PURCHASE OF JOINT ALL AMOUNT FROM THE SALE OF AGRICULTURE LAND RETAINED BY HER AT HOME FOR THE OLD-AGE SECURI TY. THE COPY OF THIS STATEMENT OF SMT. BEANT KAUR WAS ATTACHED BY THE AO. ACCORDINGLY, HE FURTHER MAKES THE STATEMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SU FFICIENT FUNDS. RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE REMAND REPORT IS EXTRACTED HEREUNDE R : FROM THE FOREGOING FACTS AND AFTER EXAMINATION THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND STATEMENT OF SMT. BEANT KAUR, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUFFICIENT FUNDS REGARDING CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 78,00,0007- IN HIS SAVING BANK ACCOUNT WITH HDFC BANK WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY HIM FROM HIS MOTHER, SMT. BEANT KAUR OUT OF SALE PROCEE DS OF AGRICULTURE LAND IN HER NAME. 3.2 FROM THIS, CIT(A) CAME TO THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSION : 4.5 THE ISSUE WAS FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFI CER FOR THE NECESSARY ENQUIRY AND VERIFICATION OF THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT IN SUPPO RT OF ITS CONTENTION. IT IS SEEN THAT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE HIS REMAND REPORT DATED 20.0 1.2017 HAS STATED HIS SATISFACTION OVER THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT AFTER NECESSARY ENQUIRIES AND ITA-1184/CHD//2017 A.Y 2009-10 PAGE 3 O F 2 VERIFICATION OF THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT. THE ASS ESSING OFFICER HAS EXPRESSED SATISFACTION OVER THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT WITH REGARD TO SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT DUE TO SALE OF AGRICULTURE LAND AND AFTER DUE VERIFICATION THE ASS ESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO SECONDED THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS IN MY CONSIDE RED VIEW THERE REMAINS NO DOUBT OVER THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT AND THEREFORE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 18,00,000/- AS PER UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT U/S 69 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS ORDERE D TO BE DELETED./ ACCORDINGLY, THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. 3.3 ACCORDINGLY, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. 4. THE LD. SR.DR RELIES UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. HOWEV ER, IN THE FACE OF THE CATEGORIC GIVING UP OF THE ISSUE IN THE AFORESAID REMAN D REPORT DATED 20.01.2017, SHE HAD NOTHING FURTHER TO STATE. THE LD. AR R ELIES UPON THE ORDER. I FIND THAT ONCE THE ISSUE HAS BEEN GIVEN UP BY THE AO IN THE REMAND REPORT IN VERY CATEGORIC TERM, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SUFFIC IENT FUNDS REGARDING CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 18 LACS WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSE E SO AS TO DEPOSIT IN THE SB ACCOUNT WITH HDFC, THE SOURCE OF WHICH WAS EXP LAINED TO BE FROM HIS MOTHER SMT. BEANT KAUR WHO TOO HAS EXPLAINED THE S AME AS OUT OF SALE PROCEED OF AGRICULTURAL LAND IN HER NAME. NO CONTRARY FACT OR REBUTTAL ASSAILING THE SAID FACT HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE. ACC ORDINGLY, IN THE FACTS AS THEY STAND, I FIND THAT THERE IS NO MERIT IN APPE AL FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE GROUND RAISED IS DISMISSED AND THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.11. 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH.