Kamlesh Rashikbhai Patel, Kalol V. ITO, Ward-4, Mehsana

ITA 189/AHD/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5771 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-01-2020
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 22-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVETIA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH (BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA. NO: 189/AHD/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14) KAMLESHRASIKBHAI PATEL LALDA VAS, NR. GARBI CHOWK NARDIPUR, KALOL- 382735 V/S INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 4, MEHSANA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: BKYPP 5961J APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. N. DIVETIA, AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIDHYUT TRIVEDI, SR. D. R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 28 -01-202 0 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31-01-2020 PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), GANDHINAGAR, AHMEDABAD DATED 13.11.2017 PER TAINING TO A.Y. 2013- 14 AND FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN TAKEN: ITA NO. 189/ AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2013-14 2 1.1 THE ORDER PASSED U/S.250 ON 13-11-2017 FOR A.Y.2013-14 BY CIT(A)-GNR, ABAD UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.39,50,000/-AS UNE XPLAINED INVESTMENTS TOWARDS PURCHASE OF LAND AND RS. 15,02,000/- TOWARD S CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK A/C MADE BY AO IS WHOLLY ILLEGAL, UNLAWFUL AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 1.2 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND OR ON FACTS IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE AO HAD NOT ALLOWED SUFFICIENT AND SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY FOR PRODUCING THE NECESSARY MATERIAL WITH REGARD TO THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS SO THAT THERE WAS GROSS VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND THE APPELLANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE DU RING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 2.1 THE LD.CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THAT THE INVESTMENT OF RS. 39,50,000/-TOWARDS PURCHASE OF LA ND AND RS. 15,02,000/- TOWARDS CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK A/C WERE UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. 2.2 THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AS WELL AS IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT NOT TO HAVE UPHELD THAT THE INVESTM ENT OF RS.39,50,000/- TOWARDS PURCHASE OF LAND AND RS. 15,02,000/- TOWARD S CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK A/C WERE UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT 3.1 THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING BOTH THE ADDITIONS WITHOUT ALLOWING TELESCOPING THE SAME. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE APPELLANT IS AN INDI VIDUAL AND ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF ESTATE AGENT IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF M /S. R J INVESTMENT. ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ON 05.11.2014 DECLARING TOTAL OF RS. 1,86,000/-. THEREAFTER CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE A.O. FROM ITS THAT THE APPELLANT HAD PURCHASED LAND BEARING S ERIAL NO. 370/1 ADMEASURING ITA NO. 189/ AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2013-14 3 2616 SQM AT KADI FOR RS. 38,35,100/- WHICH PAID BY CHEQUE FROM ACCOUNT WITH AXIS BANK. THEREAFTER A NOTICE WAS ISSUED WHEREIN P URSUANT TO THE SAID NOTICE, ASSESSEE STATED THAT MONEY TO THE TUNE OF RS. 38,45 ,000/- WERE DEPOSITED IN CASH WHICH WERE RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS PARTIES. THER EAFTER APPELLANT WAS ASKED TO FURNISH SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS. ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE SAID AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED FROM SEVERAL PERSONS AND SOME AMOUNT WAS R ECEIVED BY WAY OF INHERITANCE UPON BOTH OF HIS FATHER AND AGRICULTURE INCOME. BUT LD. A.O. REJECTED SAID EXPLANATION THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASS ESSEE IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY DOCUMENT EVIDENCE AND MADE ADDITION OF RS. 39,50,00 0/- TOWARDS PURCHASE OF LAND AND RS. 15,02,000/- TOWARDS CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT WERE UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. 4. THEREAFTER ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST STATUTORY APPEA L BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE LD. A.O. 5. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT RECORD AND IMPUGN ED ORDER AND HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. ASSESSEE CONTENTION IS THAT NO PROPER OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBMIT CERTAIN DOCUMENT IN SUPPORT OF H IS CONTENTION AND LOWER AUTHORITY HURRIEDLY MADE AND CONFIRMED ADDITION WIT HOUT ALLOWING SUFFICIENT AND SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY FOR PRODUCING THE NECESSAR Y MATERIAL WITH REGARD TO IMPUGNED ADDITION AND SAME AMOUNT TO VIOLATION OF P RINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 6. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THIS MATER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. TO DECIDE A MATTER AFRESH AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE WITH THE CONDITION THAT ASSESSEE SHALL DEP OSIT RS. 5,000/- AS COST WITH THE DEPARTMENT WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE RECEIPT OF T HIS ORDER. THEREAFTER A.O. ITA NO. 189/ AHD/2018 . A.Y. 2013-14 4 WILL GO AHEAD WITH THE PROCEEDING AND WILL PASS AN ORDER AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 31 - 01- 2020 SD/- SD/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 31/01/2020 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD