Sh. Avtar Singh, Amritsar. V. The Income-tax Officer, Amritsar.

ITA 174/ASR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0742 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S KANWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K R JAIN
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR (SMC). BEFORE SH. A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 PAN: BBVPS6194N SH. AVTAR SINGH VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, S/O SH. NIRMAL SINGH WARD 4(1), AMRITSAR. VPO RAJDHAN, BABA BAKALA. DISTT. AMRITSAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. K.R. JAIN, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SH. S.S. KANWAL, DR DATE OF HEARING: 10/05/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24/05/2016 ORDER THIS IS THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2008-09, AGAINST THE ORDER, DATED 27.01.2015, PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), AMRITSAR. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF A PPEAL: 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS WRONG, ILLEGAL AND AGAINST FAC TS. 2. THAT THE AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS WHILE MAK ING ADDITION OF RS.11,42,800/- ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME FRO M UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND LIKEWISE AND CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE SAME. 3. THAT THE AO HAS NOT APPRECIATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, EXPLANATION OFFERED AND PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE ADDI TION ARBITRARILY. ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 2 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS IN SERVICE IN THE PUNJAB POLICE DEPARTMENT. THE AO FOUND THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAD MADE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS.11,42,800/- IN HIS SAVINGS BANK A/C NO. 115301000005311 IN CENTURIAN BANK OF PUNJAB LTD., A MRITSAR ON VARIOUS DATES DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE AMOUNTS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WER E SENT BY HIS DAUGHTER, MS. NAVNEET KAUR, EMPLOYED IN ENGLAND. TH E ASSESSEE ALSO STATED THAT HE IS AN AGRICULTURIST AND DERIVES INCO ME FROM AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS. HE HAD FILED THE COPIES OF JAMABANDI A ND J-FORMS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTIONS. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE J-FOR MS WERE IN THE NAME OF SH. NIRMAL SINGH, FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, AND ON LY SOME J-FORMS WERE IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE BUT THE SAME PERTAINED TO THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS. THE JAMABANDI OF THE LAND WAS ALSO IN THE NA ME OF THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSI TS MADE IN THE CENTURIAN BANK OF PUNJAB LTD. FROM AGRICULTURAL INC OME. 2.1. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT HIS DAUGHTER MS. NAVNEET KAUR, WHO WAS EMPLOYED UNMARRIED AND EM PLOYED IN ENGLAND, WAS SENDING HER SAVINGS TO HER PARENTS SIN CE 2004. IN THIS REGARD, THE COPIES OF WESTERN UNION VOUCHERS WERE F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM WHICH, THE AO INFERRED THAT CASH AMOUNTING TO RS.8,50,000/- WAS RECEIVED BY TRANSFER THROUGH WESTERN UNION FOREIGN CURRENCY FROM MS. NAVNEET KAUR, BUT THE SAME WAS SENT IN THE NAME OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR, ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 3 WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE AND NOT IN THE NAME OF THE ASS ESSEE. MOREOVER, SMT. BALBIR KAUR WAS MAINTAINING HER SEPARATE BANK ACCOU NT, BUT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED ANY EVIDENCE SHOWING THE CO-RELATION OF DEBIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF HIS WIFE AND CORRESP ONDING CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, THE AO HELD THAT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSE E REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. 2.2. THE ASSESSEE HAD FURTHER STATED THAT HE HAD SO LD A PLOT FOR RS.364,000/-, WHICH WAS ALSO RUNNING IN THE BANKS O R SELF WITHDRAWALS IN LAST YEAR. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D NOT GIVEN ANY SPECIFIC DETAILS OF CASH DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS M ADE IN AND OUT WITH HIS BANK ACCOUNT, AS ALLEGED. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE PLOT WAS SOLD ON 04.10.2006, WHICH DATE WAS NOT RELEVANT TO THE Y EAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO HELD THAT THE ST ATEMENT OF AFFAIRS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. HE, THEREFORE, TREATED THE CASH DEPOSITS TO THE TUNE OF RS.11,42,800/- MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BANK ACC OUNT IN CENTURIAN BANK OF PUNJAB LTD., AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS AND ADDED IT TO THE TOTAL INCOME. 3. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), BY WAY OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, THAT HE HAD BEEN IN SERVICE WITH THE P UNJAB POLICE DEPARTMENT SINCE LONG AND HIS SOURCE OF INCOME WAS FROM SALARY AND THE SOURCE OF THE DEPOSITS IN THE SAID SAVINGS BANK ACC OUNT HAD BEEN ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 4 EXPLAINED BY HIM TO THE AO VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 22 .12.2010; THAT HE HAD INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE AND HE WAS LIVING IN A JOIN T FAMILY HAVING COMMON KITCHEN IN VILLAGE RAJDHAN, BABA BAKALA, DI STRICT AMRITSAR. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS, I.E., THE YEARS ENDING 31.03.2006, 31.03.2007 AND 31.03.2 008 AND STATED THAT THERE WAS NO UNEXPLAINED INCOME AND THE AO HAD NOT CONSIDERED THE EXPLANATION ALONGWITH THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES FILED. THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A ND CONFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 4. BEFORE US, BESIDES ORAL ARGUMENTS, WRITTEN SUBM ISSIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS: RESPECTFULLY IT IS SUBMITTED AS UNDER: - 1. THAT THIS IS AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT( A) DATED 27/01/2015 CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 11,42,800 /-. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE APPE LLANT IS IN SERVICE OF POLICE DEPARTMENT (POLICE MAN IN PAP) PU NJAB GOVERNMENT FROM THE LAST MORE THAN 38 YEARS AND FIL ED INCOME TAX RETURN ON 28/07/2008 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS. 88,507/-. CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED U/S 143(2). 3. THAT THE AO ENQUIRED ABOUT THE DEPOSIT OF RS. 1 1,42,800/- IN SAVING BANK A/C WITH CENTURION BANK OF PUNJAB LT D. COURT ROAD, AMRITSAR A/C NO. 115301000005311. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THIS AMOUNT HAS BEEN DEPOSI TED FROM THE FOLLOWING SOURCES:- 3.1 THAT FAMILY OWNS 10 KILAS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. NET AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE IS RS. 3 LACS PER ANNUM. THE S AVINGS AFTER MEETING HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES, SALE PRODUCE FRO M AGRI CULTURAL PRODUCE REMAINS WITH THE APPELLANT AS THER E IS NO BANK ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER. COPY OF ZAM ABANDI ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 5 AND FORM J WERE FILED BEFORE THE AO AND AS WELL AS BEFORE THE CIT(A). 3.2 THAT DAUGHTER OF ASSESSEE MISS NAVNEET KAUR WHO IS RESIDING AND EMPLOYED IN ENGLAND HAS BEEN SENDING HER SAVING S TO PARENTS. 3.3 THAT APPELLANT SOLD A PLOT FOR RS. 3,64,000/-. 3.4 THAT THE BANK DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT OF CASH AV AILABLE WITH THE FAMILY WITH THE OBJECT OF GETTING AUSTRALIAN ST UDENT VISA FOR MR. HARJOT SINGH, SON OF THE APPELLANT WHO HAD APPLIED FOR THE VISA TO THE EMBASSY. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT FUNDS WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR DEPOSIT IN THE BANK A/C WITH THE OBJECT OF OBTAINING VISA (REFERENCE PBP 6B) IND ICATING THAT THE VISA WAS APPLIED AND FINALLY REJECTED. REFERENC E TO PBP 54 INDICATING THE REPAYMENT OF DD PREPARED FOR VISI T OF SH. HARJOT SINGH TO AUSTRALIA. 3.5 THAT ALL THE FUNDS WERE PUT TOGETHER WITH THE SOLE OBJECT OF GETTING STUDENT VISA FOR SH. HARJOT SINGH SON OF TH E APPELLANT. 4. THAT THE AO HAS NOT APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT THESE FUNDS WERE AVAILABLE DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. REFERENCE MAY KINDLY BE MADE TO CONSOLIDATED BANK STATEMENT (PBP 43-46). COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER (PB P 72 TO 75). 5. THAT LD. INCOME TAX OFFICER WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, EXPLANATION OFFERED, PROCEEDED TO MAKE TH E ADDITION ARBITRARILY. 6. THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT NO CEREMONY OR FUNCTION WAS PERFORME D IN THE FAMILY. 7. REGARDING AGRICULTURAL HOLDING : APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT HE(FAMILY) IS AN AGRICULTU RIST AND DERIVES INCOME FROM AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS. THE FA MILY OWNS 10 QUILAS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. COPY OF ZAMABANDI ( PBP 7 & 8) ENGLISH TRANSLATION (PBP 9 & 10) AND J-FORM (PBP 11 TO 13) WERE FILED BEFORE THE AO (PBP 14) WERE FILED BE FORE THE CIT(A). IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT NET AGRICULTURE PRODU CE IS RS. 3,00,000/- (APPROX.) PER ANNUM. ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 6 THAT AO OBSERVED THAT ZAMABANDI AND J-FORM WERE IN NAME OF SH. NIRMAL SINGH, FATHER OF THE APPELLANT AND AS SUCH APPELLANT IS NOT THE OWNER OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND AND HENCE REJECTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE APPELLANT. J-FORM I N THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT DO NOT PERTAIN TO THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR UNDER REFERENCE. AO HAS HOWEVER ACCEPTED THAT THE LAND HO LDINGS AND INCOME THEREFROM WHICH IS IN THE NAME OF FATHER . AO DID NOT APPRECIATED THE SUBMISSION THAT IT IS A JOINT F AMILY LIVING JOINTLY WITH COMMON KITCHEN (REF. RATION CARD PBP 1 5 & 16). THERE IS NO BANKS ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF SH. NIRMAL SINGH, FATHER OF THE APPELLANT AND AS SUCH FUNDS WERE AVAI LABLE WITH THE APPELLANT. SH. NIRMAL SINGH HAS ALSO FILED AN A FFIDAVIT (PBP 17) ENGLISH TRANSLATION (PBP 18) WHEREIN HE HA S MENTIONED THAT HE OWNS 10 QILAS OF AGRICULTURAL LAN D AND HIS AGE IS 83 YEARS AND AS SUCH MANAGEMENT OF AGRIC ULTURAL LAND AND FUNDS ARE LOOKED AFTER BY HIS SON SH. AVTA R SINGH (APPELLANT). THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO BEEN SELLING AG RICULTURE PRODUCE AS PER FORM-J (PBP 11 TO 14). THE ONLY REAS ON FOR REJECTING SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT BY THE AO AND CONFIRMATION OF SAME BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS THAT THE LAND IS IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER OF THE APPELLANT. THE OBS ERVATION OF THE AO ARE ERRONEOUS AND WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION. IT IS ABSOLUTELY LEGAL AND CORRECT THAT THE JOINT FAMILY LAND IS IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER WHO IS THE ELDEST MALE MEMBE R. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS MENTIONED ABOVE IT MAY KINDLY BE APPRECIATED THAT CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED WHILE CONF IRMING THE FINDINGS OF THE AO IN THIS ISSUE. 8. REMITTANCE FROM DAUGHTER : THAT DAUGHTER OF THE ASSESSEE MISS. NAVNEET KAUR WH O IS UNMARRIED AND EMPLOYED IN ENGLAND, SHE HAS BEEN SEN DING HIS SAVINGS TO HER PARENTS SINCE 2004. COPIES OF WE STERN UNION VOUCHERS WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO. AS PER VOUCHER RS. 8,32,564/- WAS RECEIVED BY THE PARENTS ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSFER THROUGH WESTERN UNION. THERE IS NO BANK ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF NAVNEET KAUR IN INDIA SO THE CASH WAS RECEIVED IN THE NAME OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR WIFE O F THE APPELLANT AND WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE FAMILY. AO OBSERVED THAT FOREIGN REMITTANCE ARE SENT IN THE NAME OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR, WIFE OF THE APPELLANT AND NOT ON THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT. AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THERE IS NO CO- RELATION IN THE DEBIT ENTRIES (WITHDRAWALS) IN THE BANK ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 7 ACCOUNT OF HIS WIFE AND CORRESPONDING CREDIT ENTRIE S IN THE SAVING ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT WITH CENTURION BANK OF PUNJAB. THAT THE CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO AND FURTHER OBSERVED THAT WITHDRAWALS IN THE ACCOUNT OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR WERE MUCH BEFORE THE DATES ON WHICH THE APPELLANT DEPOSITED CASH IN HIS CENTURION BANK OF P UNJAB LTD. 8.1. THAT ASSESSEE EARNED INTEREST ON DEPOSIT OF MO NEY RECEIVED FROM BALBIR KAUR AND DECLARED THE SAME IN THE ITR A ND THE SAME HAS BEEN ASSESSED (PBP 36) 8.2 THAT ID. AO AND CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIAT E THE FACT THAT SOLE OBJECT OF THE BANK TRANSACTIONS WERE TO INDICA TE THE FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE THAT THE APPELLANT PURPOSEL Y AVOIDED THE DIRECT CO-RELATION OF DEBIT AND CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK A/C OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR AND APPELLANT. THE OBJECT W AS TO OBTAIN VISA AND SHOW MORE ENTRIES. 9 SALE OF LAND : THE APPELLANT HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT HE HAD SOL D PLOT OF RS. 3,64,000/- ON 04/10/2006 (PBP 37 TO 39) AND ENG LISH TRANSLATION (PBP 40 TO 42). THE AO OBSERVES THAT AS SESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY DETAILS OF CASH DEPOSITS AND WITH DRAWALS MADE IN AND OUT OF THE BANK A/C AND AS SUCH REJECTE D THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT PLOT WAS SOLD ON 04/10/200 6 WHICH IS NOT RELEVANT FOR YEAR UNDER ASSESSMENT WIT HOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 3,64, 000/- WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. HENCE CIT(A) IS NOT JU STIFIED WHILE CONFIRMING THE FINDINGS OF THE AO. 10.. STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS FOR F.Y. 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2007-08 : THAT CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF ALL THE BANK A/C FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08 (PBP 43 TO 46) AND 2008-09 (PBP 47 TO 49) A RE ENCLOSED HEREWITH. 10.1 THAT APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO HIS STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2007-08 WHICH CLEARLY EXPLAINS THE CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK A/C. THE AO HAS NOT CONSIDERED THESE IN PROPER AND JUDICIAL MANNER. ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 8 FURTHER CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT APPELLANT HAS SHOWN CA PITAL OF RS. 10,11,112/- AS ON 01/04/2005. THIS AMOUNT IS AS ON 31/03/2006 I.E. 01/04/2006) BUT NO EVIDENCE IN THIS REGARD HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AS TO HOW CAPITAL WAS GENERATED (WHICH IS FACTUALLY WRONG). THE PERUSAL OF THE SAID BALANC E SHEET AS ON 31/03/2006 (PBP 69) WOULD INDICATE THAT A SUM OF RS. 10,11,112/- IS THE SUM TOTAL OF DEPOSIT IN VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS AND CASH AVAILABLE. 10.2 THAT COPIES OF ALL BANK ACCOUNTS AS PER DETAIL S BELOW ARE ENCLOSED HEREWITH :- CENTURION BANK OF PUNJAB A/C NO. 58SB143220943 /II5301000005311 CENTURION BANK OF PUNJAB A/C NO. 58SB143214600 /115301000152370 ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE A/C NO. 01562011005065 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK A/C NO. 3299107 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK A/C NO. 3417000100096207 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK A/C NO. 3417000100104722 HENCE IT IS CLEAR THAT AMOUNT TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 10,70,147/- WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE APPELLANT AS ON 04/10/2006 RELEV ANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS STRONGLY RELIE D ON THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT HAS BEEN CONTENDED THAT THE CASH AMOUNTED TO RS.11,42,800/- THE DETAILS WHEREOF ARE AT PAGE 54 OF THE ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS; THAT T HE AMOUNTS SENT BY HIS DAUGHTER, MS. NAVNEET KAUR FROM ENGLAND, WHICH WER E SENT TO SMT. BALBIR KAUR, WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE AND MOTHER OF MS. NAVNEET KAUR, DID NOT EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE; THAT THE WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE ALSO DID NOT EXPLAIN THE SAID DEPOSITS, SINCE, AS CORRECTLY OBSE RVED BY THE LD. CIT(A), ALL THE WITHDRAWALS WITH THE NARRATION WRITTEN SU BMISSION WERE ON ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 9 DATES MUCH BEFORE THE DEPOSITS WERE MADE; THAT THE WITHDRAWALS MADE IN F.Y. 2005-06 ALSO DID NOT EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS, WHICH WERE MADE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION; THAT THE ASSES SEE HAD ALSO FAILED TO ESTABLISH ANY CO-RELATION BETWEEN THE WITHDRAWALS M ADE FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF HIS WIFE AND THE CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE S AVINGS BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE; THAT SINCE AGRICULTURAL LAND WAS IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, NO BENEFIT OF INCOME FROM SUCH LAN D CAN BE SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS; THAT THE J-FO RMS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE PERTAINING TO THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS A ND SO, AGAIN, THEY COULD EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS; THAT APROPOS THE STATE MENT OF AFFAIRS FOR THE F.YS. 2005-06, 2006-07 AND 2007-08, THOUGH CAPITAL OF RS.10,11,112/- WAS SHOWN, THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ITS GEN ERATION; THAT THE LOANS OF RS.2 LAKHS AND EDUCATION LOAN OF RS.2.70 L AKHS, WHICH HAD BEEN SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2007, ALSO DID NOT FIND ANY SUPPORT IN THE FORM OF ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER; THA T ALSO, THIS CLAIM WAS A NEW STORY INTRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT(A) CORRECTLY REJECTED THE SAME. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAVE PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE DEPOSITS IN THE SAVINGS BA NK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE ARE STATED TO HAVE COME FROM FOUR SOURCES, I.E., MONEY SENT BY THE ASSESSEES DAUGHTER FROM ENGLAND, WITHDRAWAL FR OM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE, AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. SO FAR AS REGARDS THE MONEY AMOU NTING TO ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 10 RS.1,83,936/-, STATED TO HAVE BEEN SENT FROM ENGLAN D BY THE ASSESSEES DAUGHTER MS. NAVNEET KAUR, THE OBJECTION TAKEN BY T HE AO WAS THAT THE AMOUNT WAS NOT SENT IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE, B UT IN THE NAME OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR, WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE AND MOTHER O F MS. NAVNEET KAUR. IT WAS ALSO OBJECTED THAT THE DEBIT ENTRY REPRESEN TING WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR DID NOT CORRES POND WITH THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE SAVINGS ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESS EE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO MAINTAINED THAT HE HAD EARNED INTEREST ON TH E DEPOSIT OF MONEY RECEIVED FROM HIS WIFE. PAGE 36 OF THE PAPER BOOK C ONTAINS DETAILS OF SUCH INTEREST AS ON 31.03.2008. THE RELEVANT ENTRY : BY S/B A/C INTEREST PNB 698 THIS CORRESPONDS TO THE COPY OF THE SAVINGS BANK A CCOUNT OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR WITH PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK (APB 66). 7. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER MAINTAINED THAT THE SOL E OBJECT OF THE BANK TRANSACTIONS WAS TO INDICATE THE FINANCIAL ST ATUS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR OBTAINING VISA FOR HIS SON, SH. HARJOT SINGH, BY SH OWING MORE ENTRIES. 8. THE FACTUM OF THE DAUGHTER OF THE ASSESSEE HAVIN G SENT MONEY NOT TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT HER MOTHER IS NOT, IN ANY WAY, UNNATURAL. THE ASSESSEE WITHDREW THESE AMOUNTS FROM SMT. BALBIR KA URS ACCOUNT AND THEY WERE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSE SSEE. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE EARNED INTEREST ON SUCH AM OUNTS. THIS BUTTRESSES THE ASSESSEES STAND THAT THE BANK TRANS ACTIONS WERE ENTERED INTO, SO AS TO FACILITATE OBTAINING OF VISA FOR T HE SON OF THE ASSESSEE. IN ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 11 THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE REMITTANCE O F MONEY BY MS. NAVNEET KAUR FROM ENGLAND IS ACCEPTED. 9. APROPOS THE WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SMT. BALBIR KAUR, WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE, THEY ALSO STAND EXPLAI NED, AS ABOVE. 10. SO FAR AS REGARDS THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME, SINC E IT IS THE FAMILY OF THE ASSESSEE WHO OWNS THE AGRICULTURAL LAND AND TH E ASSESSEE DERIVES INCOME THEREFROM, JUST BECAUSE THE LAND WAS IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, WAS NO REASON FOR THE TAXING AUTHORIT IES TO HOLD AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE JAMABANDI AND THE J-FORMS WERE WR ONGLY REJECTED BY THE AUTHORITIES. THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY SH. NIRMAL SINGH, FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, WAS ALSO WRONGLY NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDER ATION. 11. SO FAR AS REGARDS THE SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND , IT DOES NOT STAND DISPUTED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.3,64,000/- WAS AVAIL ABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE, WHICH SUPPORTS THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT HE HAD SOLD A PLOT OF AGRICULTURAL LAND ON 04.10.2006. THE COPY O F THE RELEVANT REGISTERED CONVEYANCE DEED (APB 37 TO 39) WAS ILLE GAL IGNORED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 12. FURTHER, THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS FOR F.YS. 200 5-06 TO 2007-08 HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES, WHICH STATEMENT ADEQUATELY EXPLAINS THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS WERE WRONGLY IGNORED BY THE TAXING AUTHORITIES. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO ERRED IN OBSERVING THAT THE CA PITAL OF RS.10,11,112/-, AS ON 01.04.2005 REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. THE ASSESSEE S BALANCE SHEET AS ITA NO.174(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 12 ON 31.03.2006 (APB 69) SHOWS THAT THE TOTAL DEPOSIT S IN THE VARIOUS BANK AND CASH CAME TO RS.10,11,112/-. 13. AS PER THE DETAILS OF BANK ACCOUNTS WITH CENTUR IAN BANK OF PUNJAB, ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND PUNJAB NATION AL BANK, THEY DEPICT THAT AS ON 4.10.2006, RELEVANT TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE AMOUNT OF RS.10,70,147/- WAS AVAILABLE WITH TH E ASSESSEE. 14. MOREOVER, THE LD. CIT(A) HIMSELF, VIDE ORDER, D ATED 26.10.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, HAS DELETED A SIMILAR ADDITION IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. 15. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, FINDING MERIT IN THE GRIE VANCE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME IS ACCEPTED. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) I S REVERSED. THE ADDITION IS DELETED. 16. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/05/ 2 016. SD/- (A.D. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER /SKR/ DATED: 24/05/2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SH. AVTAR SINGH S/O SH. NIRMAL SINGH, VPO RAJDHAN, AMRITSAR. 2. THE ITO WARD 4(1), ASR. 3. THE CIT(A), ASR. 4. THE CIT, ASR. 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER