Shri Harinder Singh Jahangir, Sangrur V. ITO-Ward-1, Sangrur

ITA 155/CHANDI/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1473 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH, SMC, CHANDIGARH , BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 155/CHD/2020 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHRI HARINDER SINGH JAHANGIR, WARD NO.21, HOUSING BOARD COLONY, NABHA GATE, SANGRUR THE ITO, WARD-1, SANGRUR ./PAN NO: ADXPJ5710C / APPELLANT '# /RESPONDENT HEARING THOUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING $% & ' /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUDHIR SEHGAL, ADVOCATE & ' / REVENUE BY : SMT. MEENAKSHI VOHRA, ADDL. CIT ( ) & % * /DATE OF HEARING : 08.12..2020 +,- & % * / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.12.2020 / ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 5.12.2019 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS), PATIALA [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)]. 2. IT IS NOTICED THAT THIS IS THE SECOND ROUND OF A PPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. EARLIER THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 19.1.2016 OF THE CIT(A). THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER D ATED 18.5.2016 PASSED IN ITA NO.291/CHD/2016 HAS REMANDED THE MATTER TO THE CIT(A) FOR DECISION AFRESH, THEREBY, THE LD. CIT(A) PASSED THE IMPUGNE D ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THE PRESENT APPEAL. ITA NO. 155-CHD-2020 SHRI HARINDER SI NGH JAHANGIR, SANGRUR 2 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACT ION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ASSESSING THE INCOME AT RS . 9,05,200/- AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 1,07, 500/-. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADD ITION OF RS. 1,87,700/- ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AS PER PARA 4.3 OF THE ORDER. 3. NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE SAID GROUND OF APPEAL, TH E CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS. 1,87,700/- IS ON TH E HIGHER SIDE. 4. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADD ITION OF RS. 6 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSITS IN THE REGULAR BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS IGNORED THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES AND SUBMISSIONS AS MADE BY THE DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS AND SUBMISSIONS AS ALREADY MADE BEFORE HIM. 6. THAT THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE AGAINST THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 7. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS FINALLY HEAR D OR DISPOSED OFF. 4. GROUND NO.1 : VIDE GROUND NO.1, THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT O F THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 9,05,200/- AGAINST THE RETURNED I NCOME OF RS. 1.07,500/-, HOWEVER, A PERUSAL OF THE SUBSEQUENT GROUNDS OF APP EAL REVEAL THAT ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED INDIVIDUALLY EACH OF THE ADDITION CO NFIRMED BY THE CIT(A), WHICH ARE BEING DISCUSSED ACCORDINGLY IN SUBSEQUEN T PARAGRAPHS. ITA NO. 155-CHD-2020 SHRI HARINDER SI NGH JAHANGIR, SANGRUR 3 THUS, GROUND NO.1 OF THE APPEAL BEING GENERAL IN N ATURE DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SPECIFIC ADJUDICATION. 5. GROUND NOS.2 & 3 : VIDE GROUND NOS.2 & 3, THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATE D THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIO N OF RS. 1,87,700/- ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS SUBMITTED THE ISSUE RAISED VIDE THESE GROUNDS IS NOT PRESSED. A WRITTE N NOTE IN THIS RESPECT HAS ALSO BEEN GIVEN IN THE SUBMISSIONS DATED 1.07.2020, WHEREBY, IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHO LD EXPENSES IS NOT PRESSED. IN VIEW OF THIS, GROUND NOS. 2 & 3 STAND DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 6. GROUND NOS. 4 TO 6 : VIDE THESE GROUNDS, THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS. 6 LACS ON ACCOU NT OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN THIS RESPECT HA S INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND T HE EVIDENCES BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SUBMIT THAT THE AFORESAID DEPOSIT OF RS. 6 LACS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ON ACCOUNT OF EARNEST MONEY REC EIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH BROTHERS NAMELY JUGRAJ SINGH AND BALJIN DER SINGH JAHANGIR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT TO SELL WITH T HE PROPOSED PURCHASER OF THEIR PROPERTY NAMELY SHRI BALDEV SINGH IN APRIL 20 07. IT HAS BEEN FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID DEED DID NOT GET MATURE AND THE AGREEMENT WAS RESCINDED ON 27.9.2007 AND THE AMOUNT RECEIVED WAS RETURNED TO THE SAID PROPOSED PURCHASER. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS RESPECT HA S RELIED UPON THE COPY OF ITA NO. 155-CHD-2020 SHRI HARINDER SI NGH JAHANGIR, SANGRUR 4 THE AGREEMENT TO SELL. DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDING S, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SUMMONED THE SAID PROPOSED PURCHASER SHRI BALDE V SINGH AND EXAMINED HIM TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. SHRI BALDEV SINGH IN HIS STATEMENT DATED 6.3.2019 RECORDED BEFORE THE ASSESS ING OFFICER HAS CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT AN AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED BY HIM WITH THE ASSESSEE AND HIS BROTHERS AND HE HAD PAID RS. 6 LACS IN LIEU OF THAT. HE ALSO EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF HIS SAID INCOME BEING AGRICULTURAL IN COME. HE HAS ALSO STATED ON OATH THAT THE SAID AGREEMENT TO SELL DID NOT MAT URE AND THE AMOUNT OF RS. 6 LACS WAS RECEIVED BACK BY HIM FROM THE ASSESSEE. AP ART FROM THAT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO EXAMINED SHRI VINOD KUMA R BINDAL, ADVOCATE WHO HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE SAID AGREEMENT DATED 27. 4.2007 WAS TYPED ON HIS DICTATION AND HE HAS PUT HIS SEAL AND SIGNATURE ON THE SAID DOCUMENT AND EVEN BOTH THE PARTIES PUT THEIR SIGNATURES IN HIS PRESEN CE ON THE SAID AGREEMENT. THE ASSESSEE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES HAS NOT ONLY PROD UCED THE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT BUT HAS ALSO GOT THE STATEMENT RECORD ED OF THE SAID PURCHASER OF THE PROPERTY FROM WHOM THE MONEY WAS RECEIVED AND E VEN HAS ALSO GOT EXAMINED THE WITNESS OF THE SAID AGREEMENT WHO HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE SAID AGREEMENT WAS EVEN DICTATED BY HIM, TYPED BY TYPIST AND HE HAS ALSO PUT HIS SIGNATURE AND SEAL ON THE SAID AGREEMENT. THE ASSES SEE, THEREFORE, HAS DISCHARGED HIS BURDEN BEYOND DOUBT AND THE INCOME-T AX AUTHORITIES COULD NOT BRING ANYTHING IN REBUTTAL TO PROVE THAT THE SAID A MOUNT WAS NOT OUT OF THE EARNEST MONEY RECEIVED FROM THE SAID PURCHASER SHRI BALDEV SINGH. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADDITION CONFIRMED BY THE CI T(A) IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AND THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY ORDERED TO BE DELETED. THESE GROUNDS ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. ITA NO. 155-CHD-2020 SHRI HARINDER SI NGH JAHANGIR, SANGRUR 5 7. GROUND NO.7 : THIS GROUND IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT REQ UIRE ANY SPECIFIC ADJUDICATION. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATE D AS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 08.12.2020. SD/- ( / SANJAY GARG) / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 08.12.2020 .. /&' %0121% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. '# / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( 3% / CIT 4. ( 3% ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. 14 ' % 5 , *5 , 6789 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8: ) / GUARD FILE / ( / BY ORDER, ; / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR