Sh. Avtar Singh, Barnala V. I.T.O, Barnala

ITA 242/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5354 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 31-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 08-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH KUMAR GARG
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS.SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.242 /CHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) SH.AVTAR SINGH, VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, S/O SH.GURDEV SINGH BARNALA. VILLAGE CHANNA GULAB SINGH WALA, BARNALA. PAN: BGYPS5633L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUBHASH KUMAR GARG RESPONDENT BY : SMT.SARITA KUMARI, DR O R D E R THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A), DATED 28.12.2010 RELATING TO ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-T AX ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL : 1. THAT THE WORTHY CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN JUSTIFYING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT THE WORTHY CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.90000=00. 3. THAT THE WORTHY CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED WHILE NO T ALLOWING FULL CREDIT OF AGRICULTURE INCOME. 4. THAT THE WORTHY CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN WHILE NOT ACCEPTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF AGRICULTURE INCOME. 2 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS FINALLY HEAR D OR DISPOSED OFF. 6. THAT IT IS PRAYED THAT ADDITION OF RS.90000-00 M AY BE DELETED. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR RS.6,30,68 7/- AND ALSO HAD DEPOSITED VARIOUS AMOUNTS IN THE STATE BANK OF PATI ALA, BHADAUR AND IN MALWA GRAMIN BANK, BHADAUR. IN COMPLIANCE THE ASSE SSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.9,75,000/- A ND AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.5,93,000/-. THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT HE WAS AN AGRICULTURIST AND ALSO REARING HORSES AND BUFFALOS. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE I NFORMATION AND ALSO EXPLAINED THAT HE HAD NOT PURCHASED THE AGRICULTURA L LAND MEASURING 12 KANALS 7 MARLAS FOR RS.6,30,687/- DURING THE YEAR. IT WAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED THE LAND FOR RS.92,500/- ON 23.6.2004 AND FURTHER AGRICULTURAL LAND MEASURING 12 KANALS 13 MA RLAS WAS PURCHASED IN THE NAME OF HIS SON FOR RS.3,19,000/- ON 20.1.20 05. THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN THE SAID PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURAL LAN D WAS CLAIMED TO BE OUT OF SAVINGS FROM SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTURAL P RODUCE BOTH IN HIS NAME AND IN THE NAME OF HIS SON. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER ACCEPTED THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD. FURTHER THERE WAS DEPOSIT OF RS.9 LACS IN STATE BANK OF PATIALA, BHADAUR ON 16.4.2004 . THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAVE SOLD HORSES FOR RS.3,40,000/- ON 10 .4.2004 AND THE STATEMENT OF THE PURCHASER WAS RECORDED, IN WHICH H E ADMITTED TO HAVE PAID THE SAID SUM TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING O FFICER ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE TO THAT EXTENT. FURTHE R IT WAS CLAIMED BY THE 3 ASSESSEE THAT HE HAD SOLD ONE HORSE FOR RS.4,70,000 /- ON 12.4.2004 TO SHRI JEET SINGH, WHOSE STATEMENT WAS ALSO RECORDED AND THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THUS HELD THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE FURNISHED THE EVIDENCE FOR RS.8,10,000/- AND A S NO EVIDENCE WAS FURNISHED FOR THE BALANCE SUM OF RS.90,000/- DEPOSI TED IN THE BANK, THE SAME WAS ADDED AS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM U NEXPLAINED SOURCES. IN RESPECT OF THE DEPOSIT OF RS.3,09,677/- IN MALWA GRAMIN BANK, BHADAUR, THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT IT HAD D EPOSITED RS.1 LAC ON 5.2.2005 AND RS.85,000/- ON 31.3.2005. THE FIRST S UM OF RS.1 LAC WAS STATED TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM STATE BANK OF PATIALA, BHADAUR AND THE SECOND DEPOSIT OF RS.85,000/- WAS STATED TO BE OUT OF AGRICULTURAL SAVINGS. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEP TED WITH REGARD TO THE SAME AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AFTER MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.90,000/-. 4. IN APPEAL THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT HIS ONLY S OURCE OF INCOME WAS FROM AGRICULTURAL AND THE CREDIT OF THE BALANCE SUM OF RS.90,000/- WAS OUT OF HIS AGRICULTURAL SAVINGS AND CASH LOANS. TH E ASSESSEE FURTHER FURNISHED AN AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI NAIB SINGH, R/O KHAR AK SINGH STATING THAT TOORI OF RS.60,000/- WAS SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE AND T HE BALANCE WAS CLAIMED TO BE OUT OF HIS CASH FLOW. THE CIT(A) OBS ERVED THAT FILING OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF AN AFFIDAVI T THAT ONE SHRI NAIB SINGH HAD PURCHASED TOORI FROM THE ASSESSEE FOR RS. 60,000/- ON 10.4.2004 WAS A CONCOCTED STORY, WHICH THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE SAID AFFIDA VIT WAS NOT ADMITTED BY THE CIT(A) AND THE ADDITION OF RS.90,000/- WAS C ONFIRMED. 4 5. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT TH AT THE CREDIT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND ALSO THE CREDIT OF BYE-PROD UCTS SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ALLOWED AND HENCE THE AFORESAID AD DITION. 6. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND POINTED OUT THAT THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED IN RESPECT OF THE TOTAL INVESTMENT MADE DU RING THE YEAR I.E. AGRICULTURAL DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT EXCEPT THE SU M OF RS.90,000/- FOR WHICH NO EVIDENCE WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 7. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE RECORD. THE TOTAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YE AR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS RS.975/- PLUS AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.5,93,000/-. DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASE OF LAND FOR RS.92,500/- ON 23.6.2004 AND RS.3,19,000/- ON 20.1.2005. THE SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENT IN THE ABOVE-SAID ASSETS T OTALING RS.4,21,500/- WAS CLAIMED TO BE OUT OF SAVINGS FROM THE SALE PROC EEDS OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS IN HIS NAME AND IN THE NAME OF HIS SON. T HE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE EXPLAI NED THE DEPOSITS IN GRAMIN BANK OF RS.85,000/- TO BE OUT OF HIS AGRICUL TURAL SAVINGS WHICH WAS ALSO ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ADDIT ION TO ANOTHER DEPOSIT OF RS.1 LAC, OUT OF CORRESPONDING WITHDRAWAL MADE F ROM ANOTHER BANK ACCOUNT HELD BY THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER THERE WAS A DEPOSIT OF RS.9 LACS ON 16.4.2004 I.E. START OF THE YEAR. THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THAT RS.3,40,000/- WERE RECEIVED BY HIM ON 10.4.2004 AND RS.4,70,000/- ON 12.4.2004 OUT OF SALE OF HORSES, WHICH EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED. THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO THE AFORESAID BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.90,000/- WAS OUT OF HIS AGRICULTURAL S AVINGS. THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT THEREOF HAD FURNISHED AN AFFIDAVIT OF SH RI NAIB SINGH CLAIMING 5 THAT THE SAID PERSON HAD PURCHASED AGRICULTURAL PRO DUCE AMOUNTING TO RS.60,000/-. HOWEVER, THE SAID AFFIDAVIT AS STAND ALONE EVIDENCE., HAS NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PLACED ON RECORD THE TOTAL EVIDENCE OF THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME EARNED DURING T HE YEAR. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT IT HAD EARNED AGRICULTURAL INC OME OF RS.5,93,000/-, OUT OF WHICH CREDIT OF RS.4,21,500/- PLUS RS.85,000 /- AS REFERRED IN THE PARAS HEREINABOVE HAS BEEN ALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEING INVESTMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN AGRICULTURAL LAN D AND PART OF DEPOSIT IN ONE BANK ACCOUNT. AFTER ALLOWING THE CREDIT FOR THE AFORESAID AMOUNTS AND ALSO TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE EXPENDITURE NECESSARY TO BE INCURRED ON HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES I FIND NO MERIT IN T HE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE VIS--VIS THE BALANCE SUM OF RS.90,000/- B EING AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE OUT OF HIS AGRICULTURAL INCOME/SAVINGS. I N THE ENTIRELY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE ABSE NCE OF PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION WITH EVIDENCE BEING NOT FURNISHED BY TH E ASSESSEE, THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) IN THIS CASE ARE UPHELD. AC CORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS.90,000/- IS UPHELD. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2011. SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 29 TH JUNE, 2011 RATI COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6