Sh Charan Dass, Muktsar V. The Income Tax Officer, Muktsar

ITA 342/ASR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0813 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. A.D.JAIN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO.342(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 SH. CHARAN DASS PROP. M/S CHANNA AGRI WORKS, BARIWALA, DIST:-MUKTSAR. PAN:AHKPD-8744K VS. ITO, WARD-II(2), MUKTSAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. P. N. ARORA (ADV.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. TARSEM LAL (DR.) DATE OF HEARING: 12.04.2016 DATE OF PRONO UNCEMENT: 13.04.2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), BATHINDA, DATED 10.06.2015, FOR THE ASST. Y EAR 2011-12. 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE RAISED BY ASSESSEE IS ACTION OF LEARNED CIT(A) BY WHICH HE HAD CONFIRMED AN ADDITION OF RS.29,35,000/ - WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINE D DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS AS NOTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ARE THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY THROUGH C ASS AS ASSESSEE HAD ITA NO.34 2 (ASR)/2015 ASST. YE AR: 2011-12 2 DEPOSITED CASH AMOUNTS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE CREDIT AND DEBIT ENTRIES IN HIS SAVING BANK ACCOUNT. IN RE PLY THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE WAS A PUBLIC FIGURE IN THE TOWN A ND WAS AN ELECTED MEMBER OF NAGAR PANCHAYAT, BARIWALA AND THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BELONGED TO MR. HARBANS SINGH, S/O SH. UJJAGAR SINGH WHO HAD HANDED OVER THE AMOUNT TO THE ASSESSEE AS M R. HARBANS SINGH, WAS NOT HAVING ANY BANK ACCOUNT. IT WAS ALSO SUBMIT TED THAT LATER ON THE AMOUNT WAS WITHDRAWN BY MR. HARBANS SINGH. ALON G WITH THE SUBMISSIONS A COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF MR. HARBANS SING H DULY SWORN IN BEFORE NOTARY WAS ALSO FILED. ON RECEIPT OF SUCH RE PLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THOUGH THE DEPOSITS WERE IN C ASH BUT WITHDRAWALS WERE MADE THROUGH CHEQUES AND MOST OF THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO SH. SANT RAM AND SH. ROSHAN LAL AS WAS VISIBLE FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT, THEREFORE, ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPL AIN AS TO WHO WS SANT RAM AND ROSHAN LAL. IN REPLY IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SANT RAM WAS SON OF THE ASSESSEE AND SH. ROSHAN LAL WAS A COMMON FRIEND OF ASSESSEE AND SH. HARBANS SINGH. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT T HE PAYMENTS WERE WITHDRAWN THROUGH SELF WITHDRAWALS THROUGH THESE PE RSONS. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SH. HARBANS SINGH WAS AN OLD AGED PERSON AND HE WAS NOT HAVING ANY BANK ACCOUNT AT THAT TIME AND HE HAD DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT DUE TO THE POSSIBLE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HIS SONS. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE AMO UNTS DEPOSITED IN ITA NO.34 2 (ASR)/2015 ASST. YE AR: 2011-12 3 BANK REPRESENTED SALE OF AGRICULTURE LAND BY MR. HA RBANS SINGH. WITH THE REPLY THE COPIES OF SALE DEEDS OF LAND SOLD BY SH. HARBANS SINGH WERE ALSO ATTACHED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUIRED THE A SSESSEE TO PRODUCE SH. HARBANS SINGH AND IN REPLY THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT MR. HARBANS SINGH HAS ALREADY EXPIRED IN 2011 AND THEREFORE, TH E STATEMENTS OF SH. NAGINDER SINGH AND SH. AMARJEET SINGH SONS SH. HARB ANS SINGH WERE RECORDED WHEREIN THEY ADMITTED THAT MONEY BELONGED TO THEIR FATHER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS HOWEVER, NOT SATISFIED WITH T HE ARGUMENTS OF ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, HE MADE ADDITION OF RS.29,3 5,000/- BEING PEAK INVESTMENT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE ASSESSE E FILED APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) AND REITERATED HIS SUBMISSION S. BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE AMOUNTS D EPOSITED BY MR. HARBANS SINGH WERE WITHDRAWN AND THE AMOUNT WAS UTI LIZED FOR PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURE LAND AND COPIES OF PURCHASE DEEDS WERE FILED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A(4). HOWEVER, THE LEARNED CIT(A) DECLINED TO ACCEPT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RU LE 46A(4) AS IN HIS OPINION THE SAME WERE NOT RELEVANT. THE LEARNED CIT (A), THEREFORE, UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. ITA NO.34 2 (ASR)/2015 ASST. YE AR: 2011-12 4 6. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AR EXPLAINED THE FACT S OF THE CASE AND SUBMITTED THAT THIS WAS A STAY GRANTED CASE AND HON BLE TRIBUNAL IN THE STAY ORDER DATED 22.01.2016 HAS NOTED IN PARA 6 THA T LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE REJECTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AN D THEREFORE, HE ARGUED THAT THE FINDINGS OF TRIBUNAL IN THE STAY ORDER ITS ELF POINTS OUT THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS A RELEVANT EVIDENCE. THE LE ARNED AR ALSO INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE AFFIDAVITS SINGED BY MR. HARBA NS SINGH PLACED AT (PB 50 TO 55) AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE AFFIDAVI TS MR. HARBANS SINGH HAS CLEARLY ACCEPTED THAT AMOUNTS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BELONGED TO HIM. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT SONS OF MR. HARBANS SINGH ALSO ADMITTED THAT THE DEPOSITS BELONGED TO T HEIR FATHER. THE LEARNED AR ALSO INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO COPIES OF PURCHASE DEEDS PLACED AT (PB-14 TO 21) WHICH WERE PURCHASED BY SON OF MR. HARBANS SINGH AFTER WITHDRAWING CASH FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT CASE MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE OFFICE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL E VIDENCE AS THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE HAD DIRECT NEXUS WITH THE AMOUN TS WITHDRAWN FROM BANK. 7. THE LEARNED DR, HOWEVER, RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE REGARDING ITA NO.34 2 (ASR)/2015 ASST. YE AR: 2011-12 5 PURCHASE DEEDS OF LAND AS IN THE NAME OF SH. AMRJIT SINGH, S/O SH. HARBANS SINGH FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.11,82,000/- AND R S.12,25,000/- BOTH DATED 27.05.2010. ON THE SAME DATE FROM THE BA NK ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE AN AMOUNT OF RS.20,00,000/- WAS WITHDRAWN BY CHEQUE NO.375687. AGAINST THIS CHEQUE THE NAME OF SH. SANT RAM IS MENTIONED. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LEARNED CIT(A) HAD CLAIMED THAT THE SAID CHEQUE WAS SELF WITHDRAWN CHE QUES AND CASH WAS WITHDRAWN BY SH. SANT RAM WHO HAPPENED TO BE SON OF SH. CHARAN DAS AND WHO HAD WITHDRAWN CASH ON BEHALF OF SH. HARBANS SINGH. THE SIMULTANEOUS WITHDRAWAL OF AMOUNT FROM BANK AND REG ISTRATION OF SALE DEEDS IN THE NAME OF SON OF SH. HARBANS SINGH ESTAB LISHES NEXUS BETWEEN THE WITHDRAWAL AND REGISTRATION OF SALE DEE D AND THEREFORE THE SALE DEED WHICH THE ASSESSEE WANTED TO FILE AS ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCE IS RELEVANT TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THEREFORE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE REJECTED THE SAME AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE REMIT THIS FILE TO THE OFF ICE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WHO SHOULD PASS A FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER AFTER TAKI NG INTO ACCOUNT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND ALSO AFTER EXAMINING THE WI THDRAWALS FROM BANK WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN CASH THOUGH THE NAME OF SH. SANT RAM IS MENTIONED IN THE BANK STATE MENT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO CARRY ON ANY OTHER INVESTIGATION TO ARRIVE AT A CORRECT CONCLUSION. ITA NO.34 2 (ASR)/2015 ASST. YE AR: 2011-12 6 9. NEEDLES TO SAY THAT ASSESSEE WILL BE PROVIDED SU FFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH APRIL, 2016. SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (T. S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER DATED: 13.04. 2016. /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 (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.