Manish Rameshwarprasad Gour, Vadodara V. ITO, Ward-1(2)(4), Vadodara

ITA 127/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5410 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALIT P JAIN
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 44AD; 143(3); 201; 143(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH BEFORE: SHR I RAJPAL YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MANISH RAMESHWARPRASAD GOUR PAN: AHFPG3049P (APPELLANT) VS THE IT O , WARD - 1 (2)(4) , BARODA (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI LALIT P. JAIN , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: SHRI SURENDRA MODIANI, A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 18 - 10 - 2 018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 - 10 - 2 018 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : - THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A. Y. 2012 - 13 , ARI SES FROM ORDER OF THE CI T(A) - 2, BARODA DATED 25 - 10 - 2 017 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . 2 . THE SOLITARY GROUND OF APPEAL FILED T HE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE DECISION OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 14,68,843/ - AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF LAND. 3 . THE BRIEF FACT OF THE CASE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 3 , 78 ,380 / - ON 26 TH JULY, 2012. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED UNDER SCRUTINY BY ISSUING OF N OTICE U/S. 143(2) OF THE ACT ON 6 TH I T A NO . 127 / A HD/20 18 A SS ESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13 I.T.A NO. 127 /AHD/20 18 A.Y. 2012 - 13 PAGE NO MANISH RAMESHWARPRASAD GOUR VS. IT O 2 AUGUST, 2013 . O N THE BASIS OF AIR INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE DEPARTMENT , IT WAS NOTICED THAT ASSES S EE ALONG WITH FIVE OTHER PERSONS HAVE PURCHASE D THE FOLLOWED PIECES OF LAND. (I) NON - AGRICULTURAL LAND - BLOCK NO.533, AREA - 8562 SQR.MTR. , MOJE - PALASWADA, DABHOI, DISTT - BARODA - PURCHASED FOR RS. 30,01,548/ - . (II) NON - AGRICULTURAL LAND BLOCK NO.534, PALTI - 1, AREA - 15191 SQR. MTR., MOJE - PALASWADA, DABHOI, DISTT - BARODA - PURCHASED FOR RS.5325452/ - . ON VERIFICATION OF THE D ETAILS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO GIVE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN THE A FORESAID LAND. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSES S EE HAS SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME U/S. 44AD OF THE ACT SHOWING NET PROFIT AT RS. 6 , 07 , 356/ - @12.5% AND GROSS CONTRACT RECEIPT OF RS. 48 , 22 , 850/ - . THE ASSESSEE ALSO STATED THAT HE WAS A PARTNER IN THE FIRM M/S. SHREE K H ODIYAR D EVELOPERS, BARODA IN FINANCIAL YEAR 2001 - 12 AND HE HAD RETIRED FROM THE FIRM. THEREFORE, T HE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF C APITAL INTRODUC ED IN THE FIRM AT THE TIME OF JOI NI NG , HIS SHARE IN THE FIRM, RECEIPT FROM THE FIRM AT THE TIME OF LEAVING THE FIRM ETC. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ASKED TO PRODUCE M ATERIAL EVIDENCE THAT PURCHASE OF LAND HA D BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS STATED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBMITTED THE PERCENTAGE OF HIS SHARE IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM AND THE FIRM HAS ALSO NOT SUBMITTED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR INCLUDING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. NO MATERIAL EVIDENC E HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE FIRM OR THE PARTNER REGARDING SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASE OF THE LAND. . IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAS NOT SUBMITTED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. CONSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS TREATED THE INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASE OF THE LAND AS UNEXPLAINED AND 1/6 SHARE OF THE ASSESSEE FROM THE TOTAL INVESTMENT OF RS. 8813060 / - WHICH COMES TO RS. 14 , 68 , 843/ - WAS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE H AS FILED APPEAL BEFORE T HE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: - I.T.A NO. 127 /AHD/20 18 A.Y. 2012 - 13 PAGE NO MANISH RAMESHWARPRASAD GOUR VS. IT O 3 3. IN ORDER TO DECIDE THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FIXED ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS AS SR. NO. DATE OF NOTICE DATE OF COMPLIANCE 1 21.11.16 29.11.16 2 30.11.16 07.12.16 3 06.12.16 26.12.16 4. 30.03.17 12.04.17 5 13.04.17 27.04.17 6 29.08.17 06.09.17 7 29.09.17 13.10.17 HOWE VER, NEITHER ANYBODY ATTENDED NOR FURNISHED ANY WRITTEN EXPLANATION. NO ADJUDICATION APPLICATION HAS ALSO BEEN FILED. IT IS ALSO WORTHWHILE TO MENTION, THAT SHRI SURENDRA MODIANI, CA, WHOSE LETTER OF AUTHORITY IS ENCLOSED WITH THE APPEAL MEMO WAS ALSO CONT ACTED BY THIS OFFICE AND HE INFORMED THAT THIS APPEAL IS NO MORE HANDLED BY HIM. ON THE NOTICE DATED 13.04.2017, FIXING THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE ON 27.04.2017, 'FINAL OPPORTUNITY' WAS MARKED. THUS, IT .IS CLEAR THAT DESPITE, HAVING BEEN PROVIDED VARIOUS OPPO RTUNITIES, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT MADE ANY COMPLIANCE. THUS IT APPEARS THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING HIS APPEALAND HENCE THE SAME IS BEING DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 4. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS ON RECORD. ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED ARE PERTAINING TO ADDITION OF RS. 14,68,843/ - . UNDISPUTEDLY, THE APPELLANT HAS PURCHASED TWO IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES WORTH RS.88,13,060/ - CLAIMED TO BE ON BEHALF OF FIRM. SINCE NO RETURN OF INCOME HAS BEEN FILED BY THE FIRM, THE INVESTMENT IN THE PROPERTY CERTAINLY BELONGS TO THE PARTNERS. IT IS ALSO WORTHWHILE TO MENTION THAT SALE DEEDS ARE REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF APPELLANT CLAIMED TO BE ON BEHALF OF FIRM. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO HAS ASSESSED L/6 TH OF THE TOTAL INVESTMEN T BEING THE SHARE OF APPELLANT AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THIS CASE. THE FINDINGS OF THE AO HAVE NOT BEEN CONTROVERTED BY THE APPELLANT AND HENCE TH E ADDITION MADE AT RS. 14,68,843/ - IS CONFIRMED. NEEDLESS TO MENTION, THE AO SHALL ENSURE ASSESSME NT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE HANDS OF OTHER PARTNERS OF THE FIRM . THUS ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD CAREFULLY. IT IS NOTICED T HAT ASSESSEE ALONG WITH OTHER FIVE PERSO NS HAD MADE INVESTMENT BY PURCHASING THE PIECES OF LAND AS MENTIONED SU PRA IN THIS ORDER. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT THIS INVESTMENT IN THE LAND WAS ACCOUNTED IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM. DURING THE C O URSE OF AS SESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN AMPLE OPPORTUNIT IES I.T.A NO. 127 /AHD/20 18 A.Y. 2012 - 13 PAGE NO MANISH RAMESHWARPRASAD GOUR VS. IT O 4 TO E XPLAIN THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASE OF SUCH LAND. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY RELEVANT SUPPORTING EVIDENCE WHICH DEMONSTRATES THAT INVESTMENT IN THE LA ND WAS MADE BY THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM. EVEN IT WAS ALSO NOTICED THAT PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAS NOT FILED ANY RETURN OF INCOME . AFTER CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS AND DE TAILED FINDINGS OF LD. CIT(A), WE DO NOT F IND ANY MER I T IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE , THEREF ORE , THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 3 0 - 10 - 201 8 SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 30 /10 /2018 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,