Shri Surinder Singh, Ropar V. ITO, W-2(2), Ropar

ITA 1299/CHANDI/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7146 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHOK KHANNA

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH SMC CHANDIGARH !', # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM ./ ITA NO. 1299/CHD/2020 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI SURINDER SINGH, VPO BEHRAMPUR ZIMIDARA, DISTT & TEHSIL ROPAR. THE ITO, WARD 2(2), ROPAR. ./ PAN NO: ADYPS1992G / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VINEET KRISHAN, ADVOCATE ! / REVENUE BY : SHRI ASHOK KHANNA, ADDL. CIT ' # $/ DATE OF HEARING : 18.03.2021 %&'( $/ D ATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.04.2021 HEARING CONDUCTED VIA WEBEX $%/ ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE ASSAILS THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 09.08.2019 OF CIT(A)- 1, CHANDIGARH PERTAINING TO 2011-12 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUND : 2. (A)THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) GRAVELLY ERRED IN UPHOLDING TH E ADDITION OF RS. 5,30,000/- MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF CAS H DEPOSITED BY APPELLANT IN BANK ACCOUNT FROM SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. B) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, ADDITION IS HIGH LY EXCESSIVE. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, BOTH THE LD. AR AND THE LD. SR.DR WERE HEARD. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS EMANATING FROM THE RE CORD ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS MADE IN ITS BANK ACCOUNT. ITA 1299/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 PAGE 2 OF 4 THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE SAME SOURCED FROM SALE O F HIS IMMOVABLE PROPERTY MEASURING 39 KANAL TO SMT. RAJINDER KAUR W /O SHRI JAIMAL SINGH, MOHALLA CIVIL HOSPITAL, ANANDPUR SAHIB AT VI LLAGE AGAMPUR. SINCE AS PER THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN THE IMPUG NED ORDER, SALE PRICE MENTIONED IN THE SALE DEED WAS OF RS. 12,50,000/- P LUS STAMP DUTY OF RS. 75,000/-. THE AO CONSIDERING THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 18,90,000/- BY CHARGING LONG TER M CAPITAL GAIN TAX ON THE SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND AND ADDITION OF RS . 6,30,000/- AND ANOTHER ADDITION OF RS. 3,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF TR ANSFER OF AMOUNT THROUGH CHEQUE IN ASSESSEE'S PUNJAB & SIND BANK ACC OUNT. 3. IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE CIT(A) HELD THAT THE AO ERRED IN MAKING THE ADDITION ON THE GROUNDS OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. RELYING UPON CERTIFICATE OF THE TEHS ILDAR, ANANDPUR SAHIB, HE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE'S CASE FELL UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(14)(III)A) AND (III)(B)(1) OF THE ACT. S IMILARLY ADDITION OF RS. 3,50,000/- WAS ALSO DELETED RELYING UPON THE AFFIDA VIT OF SMT. RAJINDER KAUR, THE PURCHASER WHO CONFIRMED THAT THE AMOUNT D EPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS ENTIRELY MADE BY HER FOR PURCHASIN G THE AGRICULTURAL LAND. PART RELIEF IS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN GRANTED AC CEPTING THE STATEMENT, HOWEVER, ADDITION OF RS. 5,30,000/- WAS SUSTAINED O N THE GROUNDS OF DISCREPANCY IN THE DEPOSITS IN BANK VIS--VIS SALE DEED. 4. THE LD. AR INVITING ATTENTION TO THE IMPUGNED OR DER SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ACCEPTING THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE PURCHASER SMT. RAJINDER KAUR PROBABLY GOT MISLED BY FACTS BY REFERRING TO AFFIDA VIT OF SHRI JAIMAL SINGH ITA 1299/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 PAGE 3 OF 4 WHO WAS THE HUSBAND OF SMT. RAJIDNER KAUR WHO WAS T HE PURCHASER AND THUS HOLDING THAT SMT. RAJINDER KAURS AFFIDAVIT AC CEPTING THE PAYMENTS HAVING BEEN MADE BY HER PROCEEDED TO CONSIDER THE P OSITION OF SHRI JAIMAL SINGH. 4.1 IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, IT WAS SUBMIT TED, BOTH THE PURCHASER AS WELL AS THE SELLER HAVE APPEARED BEFOR E THE AO AND CONFIRMED THE FACT THAT THE SPECIFIC LAND WAS SOLD AT THE SPECIFIC PRICE. CERTAIN AMOUNTS WERE PAID TO THE ASSESSEE AS ADVANC E PAYMENTS WHICH WERE DEPOSITED IN THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT. AFFIDAVIT OF SMT. RAJINDER KAUR W/O SHRI JAIMAL SINGH IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CIT(A). IN THESE PECULIAR FACTS, SUSTAINING PART ADDITION ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI JAIMAL SINGH WAS NOT RELIABLE IT WAS SUBMITTED, IS CONTRARY TO THE POSITION OF LAW AS LA ID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT IN 30 ITR 181 (S.C) MEHTA PARIKH & CO V. CIT NAMELY THAT PART OF THE DOCUMENT IS RELIED AND PART OF IT IS IGNORED AN D IS ANY WAY AN IRRELEVANT SUSPICION IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CA SE. 5. THE LD. SR.DR RELIES UPON THE IMPUGNED ORDER. T HE SUBMISSIONS THAT BOTH THE PURCHASER AND SELLER HAVE APPEARED AN D ACCEPTED THAT SALE MATERIALIZED ON THE PRICE AS CANVASSED BY THE ASSES SEE AND WAS PAID BY SMT. RAJINDER KAUR ALSO STATED ON AN AFFIDAVIT BY H ER REMAINS UNREBUTTED ON RECORD. 6. I HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL ON RECORD. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THERE IS NO DISPU TE ON THE ASPECT THAT THE SPECIFIC PIECE OF LAND WAS SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE TO SMT. RAJINDER KAUR ITA 1299/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 PAGE 4 OF 4 W/O SHRI JAIMAL SINGH. THE FACT THAT THE PURCHASER AND THE SELLER HAVE REPEATEDLY AFFIRMED THE POSITION BEFORE THE AO AND STATED SO BY THE PURCHASER ON AN AFFIDAVIT ALSO IS NOT IN DISPUTE. IN THE FACTS AS THEY STAND, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REASON FOR SUSTAINING THE ADDITION, THE ADDITION IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. A PERUSAL OF T HE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE AO REMAINED FOCUSED ON IGNORING THE ASSESSEE'S CLAIM OF SITUATION OF THE LAND AS BEING BEYOND 14 KM FROM AN ANDPUR SAHIB AND THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNTS WERE DEPOSITED IN ASSESSE E'S BANK ACCOUNT PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SALE. CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENT S THAT PART PAYMENTS WERE MADE BEFORE THE DOCUMENTS WERE REGISTERED AFFI RMED BY BOTH THE PARTIES NOTHING MUCH REMAINS IN THE CASE. THE ADDI TION IS, ACCORDINGLY, DIRECTED TO THE DELETED. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED AT THE TIME OF VIRTUAL HEARING ITSELF IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES VIA W EBEX. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 06 APRIL,2021. SD/- ( !' ) (DIVA SINGH) # / JUDICIAL MEMBER ' ( / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. / CITP 4. ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH6. / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER, / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR