D Ramulu, Hyderabad V. ITO., Ward-10(2), Hyderabad

ITA 1570/HYD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 157022514 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 45 year(s) 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-01-1970
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJAT MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: P RAVI SESHAGIRI RAO
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES SMC : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO.1570/HYD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006 MR. D. RAMULU SECUNDERABAD. PAN ALSPR5587J VS., INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-10(2) HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : MR. P. RAVISESHAGIRI RAO FOR REVENUE : MR. RAJAT MITRA DATE OF HEARING : 12.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 .06.2015 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ADDITION O F RS.10,90,000 TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT BROU GHT TO TAX BY THE A.O. AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 2. BRIEFLY STATED, ASSESSEE, AN INDIVIDUAL IS DERI VING INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE. A.O. NOTICED THAT HE HAD I NFORMATION THAT ASSESSEE DEPOSITED AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,90,000 I N THE BANK ACCOUNT. ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT INVESTMENT IS BEING SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND SITUATED OUTSIDE MUNICIPAL LIMITS. A.O. WAS OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM OF LINKING IN THE SALE PROCE EDS WITH THE BANK ACCOUNT AND BROUGHT THE ENTIRE DEPOSIT OF RS.1 0,90,000 TO TAX AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. HOWEVER, THE ORDE R OF THE A.O. WAS UNDER SECTION 144 EXPARTE ASSESSEE. 3. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT HE AND HIS FAMILY OWNS AGRICULTURAL L ANDS IN 2 ITA.NO.1570/HYD/2014 MR. D. RAMULU, SECUNDERABAD. OKONDA VILLAGE OF MEDAK DISTRICT AND ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT OF SALE CUM- GPA IN FAVOUR OF M/S VAISHNAVI DEVELO PERS DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR 2002-2003 AND MONIES WERE RECEIVED AT THAT POINT OF TIME WHICH WERE IN TURN DEPOSITED AND WITHDRAWN REGULARLY FROM THE BANK. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ULTIMATE SOURCE OF THE AMOUNTS ARE THE SALE OF PROP ERTIES I.E., AGRICULTURAL LANDS. WHILE NOT ACCEPTING THE ADDITI ONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. CIT(A) HOWEVER RELIE D ON THE SAME IN ANALYSING THE ISSUE AND CAME TO THE CONCLUSION T HAT THE SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND HAS NO DIRECT LINK TO THE DEPO SITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. HE HAS EXAMINED THE AMOUNTS SHOWN IN THE VARIOUS AGREEMENTS AND LISTED OUT IN A TABLE TO COM E TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE IS NO CO-RELATION. ACCORDINGL Y, HE DISMISSED ASSESSEES APPEAL. 4. LD. COUNSEL POINTED OUT THAT ASSESSEE BEING AN AGRICULTURIST DOES NOT HAVE ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INC OME AND THESE MONIES WERE RECEIVED BY WAY OF SALE OF AGRICU LTURAL LAND WHICH IN TURN WERE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. I T WAS SUBMITTED THAT THESE AMOUNTS WERE REGULARLY BEING W ITHDRAWN AND ARE DEPOSITED AND ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE CO -RELATION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, SINCE LD. CIT(A) RE FUSED TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND NO VERIFICATION W AS DONE ABOUT THE FACTS. ASSESSEE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE M ATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF A.O. WHO ALSO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT EXPARTE UNDER SECTION 144. 5. CONSIDERING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF TH E OPINION THAT THE MATTER REQUIRE RE-EXAMINATION, SIN CE ASSESSEE DOES NOT HAVE ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME AND BEING AN AGRICULTURIST, THE IMMEDIATE SOURCE COULD BE THE SA LE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. HOWEVER, THE WITHDRAWALS AND RE- DEPOSITS 3 ITA.NO.1570/HYD/2014 MR. D. RAMULU, SECUNDERABAD. AND IF THERE WAS ANY EXPENDITURE INVOLVED HAS NOT B EEN EXAMINED PROPERLY. SINCE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AL SO WAS NOT ADMITTED BY THE LD. CIT(A), IN THE INTEREST OF JUST ICE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE MATTER HAS TO GO BACK TO THE A .O. WHO SHOULD GIVE DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, EXAMIN E THE CONTENTIONS AND DECIDE ACCORDINGLY BASED ON THE FAC TS AND LAW. FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES ARE SET ASIDE AND ENTIRE ASSESSMENT IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF A. O. TO DO IT AFRESH, BY GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19.06.2015. SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 19 TH JUNE, 2015. VBP/- COPY TO 1. MR. D. RAMULU, SECUNDERABAD. C/O. MR. S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO.102, SHRIYAS ELEGANCE, 3-6-643, STREET NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 029. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 10(2) , 5 TH FLOOR, I.T. TOWERS, A.C. GUARDS, HYDERABAD. 3. CIT(A) - V I, HYDERABAD 4. CIT - V , HYDERABAD 5. D.R. ITAT SMC BENCH, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE