D.C.I.T , CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, JALANDHAR V. SH. RAGHAV AHUJA , JALANDHAR

ITA 245/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7740 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 30-10-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 04-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S KANWAL LD
• Assessee Lawyers: PADAM BAHL LD
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Document seized; Documents seized
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NO.238(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT Y EAR:2010-11 DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR. VS. SMT. POONAM AHUJA, W/O SH. PARVEEN AHUJA, 552-C, MODEL TOWN, JALANDHAR. PAN: AALPA-9930G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A NO.240(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT Y EAR:2010-11 DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR. VS. SMT. RASHMI AHUJA, W/O LATE KAPIL AHUJA, 552-C, MODEL TOWN, JALANDHAR. PAN: AALPA-9931H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A NO.245(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR. VS. SH. RAGHAV AHUJA, S/O LATE KAPIL AHUJA, 552-C, MODEL TOWN, JALANDHAR. PAN:AHQPK-4416K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A NO.246(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR. VS. SH. PARVEEN AHUJA S/O SOHAN LAL AHUJA, 552-C, MODEL TOWN, JALANDHAR. PAN:AAPPA-3906Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. S.S.KANWAL (LD. DR) RESPONDENT BY: SH. PADAM BAHL (LD. CA) DATE OF HEARING: 30.10.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:31.10.201 7 ITA NOS.238, 240, 245 & 246 (ASR)/2017 ASST. YEARS: 2010-11 & 2011-12 2 ORDER PER BENCH: THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, ON FEELING AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER DATED 15.02.2017 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-5, LUDHIANA, FO R A. YS.: 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2. IN ALL THE FOUR APPEALS, THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT HAS RAISED THE SAME AND IDENTICAL ISSUE, THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONV ENIENCE AND BREVITY, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA NO.238(ASR)/201 7 HAVE BEEN TAKEN FOR CONSIDERATION AND RESULT OF THE SAME SHOULD AL SO BE APPLICABLE TO THE OTHER APPEALS NOS.240,245 & 246(ASR) /2017. THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE R EVENUE DEPARTMENT IN ITA NO.238(ASR)/2017. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.97,36,523/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED AND UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT U/S 69B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, IGNO RING THE FACT THAT AS PER SEIZED DOCUMENTS (COPY OF AGREEMENT) SEIZED FROM TH E RESIDENCE OF SH. VINAY KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT OF M/S PUNJAB IRON & STEEL CO. LTD ., JALANDHAR, THE COMPANY FROM WHOM M/S LAKHANPAL DESIGNS PVT. LTD, GHAZIABAD HAS PURCHASED THE LAND, WHO IN TURN SOLD THE LAND TO THE ASSESSE IN THE SAM E AREA REVEALS THAT THE RATE OF SALE PRICE WAS ACTUALLY RS. 11.05 CRORE BASED ON AGR EEMENT DATED 10.05.2007 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN SH. RAVNEET TAKHAR, S/O SH. RA VINDER SINGH, MD OF M/S PISCO AS A FIRST PARTY AND SH. MOHINDER SINGH, S/O SH. GOPAL SINGH 8S SH. JOGINDER SINGH, S/O SH. LABH SINGH AS SECOND PARTY. . 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: THAT THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE ALONGWITH SMT. RASHMI AHUJA, W/O LATE SH. KAPIL AHUJA HAS PURCHASED LA ND MEASURING 34.87 MARLAS. THEREFORE, NOTICE U/S 148 OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE ITA NOS.238, 240, 245 & 246 (ASR)/2017 ASST. YEARS: 2010-11 & 2011-12 3 ON 09.01.2015, THEREAFTER, OTHER STATUTORY NOTICES HAV E BEEN ISSUED. IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE INVES TMENT IN PURCHASE OF LAND FROM M/S LAKHNPAL DESIGNS PVT. LTD. , GHAZIABAD, WHO HAD PURCHASED LAND FROM M/S PUNJAB IRON & STEEL CO. LTD., JALANDHAR MEASURING 34.87 MARLAS DURI NG THE F.Y.2009-10 RELEVANT TO A.Y.2010-11. DURING THE COUR SE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS ON 03.08.2011 IN THE GROUP CASES OF PI SCO A VITAL DOCUMENT IS FOUND I.E. A COPY OF AGREEMENT ON NON- JUDICIAL STAMP PAPER OF RS.300/- DATED 10.05.2007 ENTE RED INTO BETWEEN SH. RAVNEET TAKHAR, S/O SH. RAVINDER SINGH, M.D. OF M/S PUNJAB IRON & STEEL CO. LTD., G.T. ROAD, JALANDH AR AND SH. MOHINDER SINGH [BAJWA], S/O SH. GOPAL SINGH, R/O MO DEL TOWN, JALANDHAR AND SH. JOGINDER SINGH, S/O SHL LABH SING H, VILL:- ROLIAN, DISTRICT:-HOSHIARPUR, FOR SALE OF LAND MEASURIN G 24 KANAL, SITUATED AT VILLAGE BEARING, G.T. ROAD, JALANDHAR. B Y THE SAID AGREEMENT, THE LAND WAS PURPORTED TO BE PURCHASED AT RS.11,05,00,000/- PER ACRE. HOWEVER, SOME OF THE PART O F THE LAND HAD BEEN PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE BY UNDER VALUING THE PURCHASE RATE AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WORKED OUT THE COST OF PURCHASE OF LAND BY THE ASSESSEE, TO THE TUNE O F RS.2,40,85,547/- AS AGAINST THE VALUE OF PURCHASE AS PER REGISTRATION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS.46,12,500/-, AND HENCE, THE DIFFERENCE WAS WORKED OUT TO RS.97,36,523/- (2,40, 85,547- 46,12,500= 1,94,73,047/-- (50% SHARE JOINTLY WITH SM T. RASHMI AHUJA) IS BEING TREATED AS UNACCOUNTED SAND UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT U/S 69B OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961, THEREFORE, W AS ADDED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. ITA NOS.238, 240, 245 & 246 (ASR)/2017 ASST. YEARS: 2010-11 & 2011-12 4 4. FEELING AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE A SSESSEE PREFERRED THE FIRST APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND IN SUPPORT OF ITS CASE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED THE LAND FROM M/S LAKHNPAL DESIGNS PVT. LTD., GHAZIABAD, AND NOT FROM M /S PUNJAB IRON & STEEL CO. LTD., JALANDHAR AS ALLEGED IN THE REASONS RECORDED. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER RELIED UPON THE ONLY ONE DOCUMENT, WHICH IS PHOTO COPY AND THEREFORE, CANNOT BE RELIED UPON BECAUSE EVENOTHERWISE THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT APP EAR ANYWHERE IN THAT PARTICULAR DOCUMENT AND IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED THE LAND ONLY ON 05.04.2010 WHEREA S THE AFORESAID DOCUMENT IS DATED 10.05.2007. THE ASSESSEE ALSO R ELIED UPON THE VARIOUS JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE VARIOUS AUTHORI TIES AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY ITAT BENCH AT AMRITSAR, THE LD. CIT( A) DELETED THE SAID ADDITION. 5. FEELING AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD . CIT(A), THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT PREFERRED THE INSTANT APPEAL ONLY ON THE SOLE GROUND AND IN SUPPORT OF ITS CASE RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. AR RELIED UPON THE ORDER P ASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE INSTANT CASE, IN ADDITION TO OTHER JUDGMENTS ALSO SQUARELY COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS ITA NOS.238, 240, 245 & 246 (ASR)/2017 ASST. YEARS: 2010-11 & 2011-12 5 BENCH IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. M/S RIAR BUILDERS PVT. LTD . IN ITA NO.116(ASR)/2017 FOR A.Y.2009-10. 7. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH WITH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE, AS WE REALIZED THAT THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE A.O ONLY ON THE BASIS OF PHOTO STAT COPY OF THE AGREEMENT, SEIZED D URING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN PISCO GROUP IN WHICH THE RATE OF TH E LAND WAS MENTIONED AS RS.11,05,00,000/- PER ACRE AND THEREFOR E, THE ASSESSING OFFICER APPLIED THE SAID RATE IN THE VALUE OF THE LAN D PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE JOINTLY WITH SMT. RASHMI AHUJA AS 50% SHARE AND T HE TOTAL UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT ARRIVED AT RS.1,94,73,047/- AND WORKED OUT UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.97 ,36,523/. THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE SAID ADDITION RELI ED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY ITAT, AMRITSAR BENCH IN ITA NOS. 659 & 660(ASR) /2014 IN THE CASE OF SH. KULWINDER SINGH AND ITA NO. 666(ASR)/2 014 IN THE CASE OF M/S HARMAN BUILDERS PVT. LTD IN WHICH THE SIMILAR AND IDENTICAL ISSUE RELATING TO ADDITION BASED UPON THE DOCUMENTS FOU ND DURING THE SEARCH AT THE PREMISES OF THE PISCO GROUP WAS INVOLVED A ND THE HONBLE ITAT, AMRITSAR BENCH DELETED THE SAID ADDITION. WHILE FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID JUDGMENTS, THE LD. CIT (A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 4.2 GROUND OF APPEAL NO. 6 RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS.97,36,523/- U/S 69B TOWARDS ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCH ASE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY. THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE AO ON THE BA SIS OF THE AGREEMENT SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN PISCO GROUP W HERE THE RATE OF THE LAND WAS MENTIONED AS RS.11,05,00,000/- PER ACRES. BY APPLYING THIS RATE ITA NOS.238, 240, 245 & 246 (ASR)/2017 ASST. YEARS: 2010-11 & 2011-12 6 THE VALUE OF THE LAND PURCHASED BY THE APPELLATE, J OINTLY WITH 50% SHARE OF SMT. RASHMI AHUJA, WAS CALCULATED BY THE AO AT RS.2 ,40,85,547/- AS AGAINST RS.46,12,500/- DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND MENTIONED IN THE REGISTRATION DEED. THE TOTAL UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT WAS ARRIVED AT RS.1,94,73,047/- AND THE UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CALCULATED AT RS.97,36,523/- (I.E. 50% OF RS.1,94,73,047/-). THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE BASIS OF ADDITION MADE B Y THE AO AND THE ARGUMENTS OF THE AR DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDING S HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDI NGS, THE AR HAS REFERRED TO THE ORDER DATED 01.08.2016 PASSED BY TH E HON'BLE ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH IN ITA NOS.659 & 660(ASR)/2014 IN TH E CASE OF SH. KULWINDER SINGH, A.Y. 2009-10 & 2010-11 AND ITA NO. 666(ASR)/2014 IN THE CASE OF M/S HARMAN BUILDERS PVT. LTD., A.Y. 200 9-10 WHEREIN THE SIMILAR ISSUE RELATING TO ADDITION BASED UPON THE D OCUMENTS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH OF THE PISCO GROUP (WHICH HAVE BEEN RELI ED UPON BY THE AO IN THIS CASE ALSO) WAS INVOLVED AND THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE HON'BLE ITAT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE'S AND THE DE PARTMENT'S APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDERS OF CIT(A) WERE DISMISSED. THE RE LEVANT PARAS OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED ORDER DATED 01.08.2016 PASSED BY TH E ITAT HAVE BEEN REPRODUCED BY THE AR IN HIS SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER DATED 01.08.2016 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE ITAT SHOWS THAT TH E FACTS OF THE CASES DECIDED BY THE HON'BLE ITAT ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACT S OF THE PRESENT CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE HON'BLE ITAT HAS DECIDED T HE ISSUE ON MERIT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN THAT CASE. THEREFORE, ON THE BASIS OF THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE HON'BLE ITAT, THE ADDITION IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT IS ALSO NOT FOUND SUSTAINABLE SINCE THE BASIS OF THE ADDITI ON IS THE SAME I.E. THE DOCUMENTS IN THE FORM OF AGREEMENT SEIZED WHERE THE RATE OF THE LAND OF M/S PISCO WAS MENTIONED AS RS.11.05 CRORES PER ACRE . THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE ITAT, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IN THIS CASE IS ALSO NOT FOUND SUSTAINABL E AND HENCE DELETED. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE OR DER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AS WELL AS ORDER DATED 26.09.2017 PASSE D IN ITA NO.116(ASR)/2017 BY THE ITAT BENCH, AMRITSAR IN THE CA SE OF DCIT VS. RIAR BUILDERS PVT. LTD. ON SIMILAR AND IDENTICAL ISSUE D ECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY RELYING UPON THE AFORESAID JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. SH. KULWINDER SINGH AND M/S HARMA N BUILDERS PVT. LTD.(SUPRA). BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESA ID JUDGMENTS ITA NOS.238, 240, 245 & 246 (ASR)/2017 ASST. YEARS: 2010-11 & 2011-12 7 PASSED BY THE ITAT, BENCH AT AMRITSAR AS WELL AS INDEPEND ENTLY APPLYING OUR MIND TO THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES OF THE CASE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY COGENT MATERIAL OR REASONS, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) BECAUSE THE SAME DOES NOT SUFFER FROM ILLEGALITY, PERVERSITY AND IMPROP RIETY, HENCE, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT. 8. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE/DEPARTMENT STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.10.2017. SD/- SD/- (T. S. KAPOOR) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:31.10.2017. /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER