Ramaben H. Grover L/H of Late Hanskamal Grover, Surat V. The Jt.CIT, Range-2, Surat

ITA 2028/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9716 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 11-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2028/AHD/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1996-97 RAMABEN H. GROVER, L/H. OF LATE SHRI HANSKAMAL GROVER, GROVER BUNGALOW, SOMNATH MAHADEV ROAD, B/H. KAPADIA ESTATE, OPP. OLD UMRA JAKAT NAKA, ATHWALINES, SURAT 395 007 .. APPELLA NT PAN : ABDPG 4659 D VS THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE, 2 SURAT .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE(S) BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSION (NONE) REVENUE BY : SHRI JAMES KURIAN , SR - DR / DATE OF HEARING 11/12/2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01/02/2016 / O R D E R PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1 , SURAT DATED 16.03.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97, ON TH E FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (I) REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT: ITA NO. 2028/AHD/2015 - RAMABEN H. GROVER VS. JCIT AY 1996-97 - 2 - ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND AS PE R LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEAL S) ERRED IN CONFIRMING REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. (II) ESTIMATE OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME: ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND AS PE R LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEAL S) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE TREATMENT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS UNDISCLOSED INCOM E. (III) MISCELLANEOUS: (1) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED INTEREST CHARGED U/S 234A, 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. (2) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR VARY AN Y OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. WE FIND THAT THE ITAT IN THE FIRST ROUND OF LITI GATION HAS RESTORED THE APPEALS BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR AY 1996- 97, VIDE ORDER NO.215 TO 219/AHD/2003 DTD. 30.09.20 08, BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- COMING TO ITA NO.219/AHD/2003 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUG H THE CASE RECORDS. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT O RDER AS WELL AS ORDER OF CIT(A). IT IS NOTICED THAT CIT( A) HAS PASSED THE APPELLATE ORDER ON A DEAD PERSON, THE FA CT IS THAT THE ASSESSEE EXPIRED ON 08.08.2000 AFTER FILIN G OF APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) ON 06.07.1999. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED THIS APPELLATE ORDER ON A DEAD PERSON WITHOUT IMPLEADING THE LEGAL HEIRS. HENCE, W E FEEL THAT THERE IS IRREGULARITY IN PASSING OF THIS APPEL LATE ORDER BY CIT(A), REASON BEING LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED ASSESSEE WAS NOT IMPLEDED BEFORE PASSING OF THIS AP PELLATE ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE TO THE FIFE OF THE CIT(A) AND CIT(A) WILL ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE ON MERITS AFRESH AFTER IMP LEADING THE LEGAL HEIRS AND ALSO P ROVIDE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). ITA NO. 2028/AHD/2015 - RAMABEN H. GROVER VS. JCIT AY 1996-97 - 3 - 2.1 IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAVE SHOWN THE CROP SALES AT RS.6,73,150 /- IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND AFTER DEDUCTING THE VARIO US EXPENSES, THE NET AGRICULTURAL INCOME WAS SHOWN AT RS.3,05,937/- IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. ACCORDING T O THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THERE WERE NO CROPS SHOWN IN FOR M NO.7X12. MOREOVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SPECIFICALLY POINTE D OUT THAT THOUGH THE LAND WAS OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE BUT NO AG RICULTURAL ACTIVITY HAD EVEN BEEN UNDERTAKEN ON THE SAID LAND AS ALSO CORROBORATED IN FORM NO.7X10 AND REPORT OF THE ADDI TIONAL COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, RANGE-2, SURAT. ONCE THERE IS NO AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY AS PER FORM NO.7X12 - WHICH I S THE RECORD OF THE REVENUE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF SELLING ANY CROP OUT OF IT. EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE SOME DECISIONS IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE EARLIER YEARS REGARDING THE CULTIVA TION AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME, BUT THE INCOME-TAX PROCEEDINGS FOR EACH YEAR IS INDEPENDENT AND DIFFERENT. 2.2 IN THE PRESENT CASE, SIMPLY BECAUSE THE ASSESSE E HAS SHOWN FIGURES OF AGRICULTURE INCOME IN P&L ACCOUNT, THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITY IS NOT BOUND TO ACCEPT THE SAM E IF THE SAME DOES NOT SUPPORT WITH EVIDENCES. THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED ITA NO. 2028/AHD/2015 - RAMABEN H. GROVER VS. JCIT AY 1996-97 - 4 - TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE AGRICULTURAL I NCOME OF RS.3,05,397/-, WHICH WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN EARNE D DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION; WHEREAS, THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER BROUGHT ON RECORD THE REPORT OF ADDL. POLICE COMMIS SIONER, RANGE-2, SURAT AND A REPORT FROM TALATI IN FORM NO. 7X10, SHOWING NO AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY WAS CARRIED OUT DU RING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE, IN OUR OPINION, THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY UP HELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN TREATING THE INCOME OF RS.3,05,937/- AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THEREFORE, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 3. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 1ST OF FEBRUARY, 2 016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( RAJESH KUMAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 01/02/2016 *BT !'# $#! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A), 5. !'# $$ , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. #() / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD