Shri Laxman Singh Pawar, Khandwa V. THE ITO, Khandwa

ITA 357/IND/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6074 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 26-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S N AGRAWAL
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE (SINGLE MEMBER CASE) BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO.357/IND/2016 A.Y. : 2009-10 SHRI LAXMAN SINGH PAWAR, I.T.O., KHANDWA GRAM JALKUNWA, VS. SINGOT, DISTT. KHANDWA APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN NO. AASHPP8369E A PPELLANT S BY : SHRI S.N. AGRAWAL, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R. A. VERMA, DR O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-II, INDORE, DATED 29.01.2016 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2009-10. DATE OF HEARING : 26 .0 5 . 20 16 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 .0 5 . 201 6 SHRI LAXMAN SINGH PAWAR, SINGOT DISTT. KHANDWA VS. CIT(A)-II, INDORE I.T.A.NO. 357/IND/2016 A.Y. 2009- 10 2 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIA(A) ERRED, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE U/S 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, EVEN WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES AND THERE WAS NO CONCEALMENT OF INCOME AS TO ATTRACT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147/148 OF THE AC T. 2.1 THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN MAINTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,50,000/- AS MADE BY THE AO WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE HIM. 2.2 THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIA(A) ERRED IN MAINTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,50,000/- TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NO OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME EXCEPT AGRICULTURAL INCOME. SHRI LAXMAN SINGH PAWAR, SINGOT DISTT. KHANDWA VS. CIT(A)-II, INDORE I.T.A.NO. 357/IND/2016 A.Y. 2009- 10 3 3 2.3 THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIA(A) ERRED IN MAINTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,50,000/- EVEN WHEN THE PEAK AMOUNT AS CALCULATED ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT FOR THIS WAS OF RS. 1,03,255/-. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE I S AN AGRICULTURIST AND HAS ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME FROM AG RICULTURAL ACTIVITIES. THE ASSESSEE AND HIS OTHER FAMILY MEMBE RS HAVE AGRICULTURAL LAND ADMEASURING 70 ACRES. THE ASSESSE E HAS SHOWN THE SOURCE OF CASH AS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK AC COUNT WAS OUT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME, OUT OF WITHDRAWAL FROM KISSAN CREDIT CARD AND OUT OF AMOUNT AS RECEIVED BACK AS A DVANCED FOR ONE TO TEN DAYS. THE AO HAS CALCULATED THE UNE XPLAINED INVESTMENT OF RS. 11,17,415/- AND ESTIMATED AGRICUL TURAL INCOME AT RS. 2,50,000/- IN PLACE OF RS. 5,80,000/- AND THEREBY ADDING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 8,50,000/- TO THE I NCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ( RS. 11,00,000/- (-) RS. 2,50,000/-. ). SHRI LAXMAN SINGH PAWAR, SINGOT DISTT. KHANDWA VS. CIT(A)-II, INDORE I.T.A.NO. 357/IND/2016 A.Y. 2009- 10 4 4 4. THE MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CI T(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,50,000/- BY OBS ERVING AS UNDER :- I HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT ON THE RELEVANT ISSUE WHICH IS REPRODUCED ABOVE. IT CAN BE EVIDENT FORM THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS THAT THE APPELLANT HAS SIMPLY TRIED TO THE FILE EXPLANATION REGARDING AVAILABILITY OF CASH FOR DEPOSITS TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION VARIOUS WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT WHEREAS THE REAL ISSUE OF GENUINE AGRICULTURE INCOME AVAILABLE FOR THE PURPOSE AS DISCUSSED IN DETAILS BY THE AO HAS NOT BEEN CONTROVERTED BY THE APPELLANT. THE VARIOUS CASE LAWS FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUND HAVE BEEN FOUND NOT APPLICABLE ON THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. THEREFORE, IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE SHRI LAXMAN SINGH PAWAR, SINGOT DISTT. KHANDWA VS. CIT(A)-II, INDORE I.T.A.NO. 357/IND/2016 A.Y. 2009- 10 5 5 BROUGHT OUT BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THEREFORE, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 2. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED DETAILS OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 AND STATEMENT AT PAPER BOOK PAGES 70-74 AND SUBMITTED THAT IF THE SAME BE EXAMINED, THEN IT WILL COME TO NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN THE CASH AND R E- DEPOSITED THE SAME. THEREFORE, NO QUESTION OF ADDIT ION ARISES. 3. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PART IES. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, I FIND THAT THIS MATTER REQUIRES PROPER EXAMINATION. IN THE INT EREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, I RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO WITH THE DIRECTION THAT HE SHALL EXAMINE AND VERIFY THE DETAILS OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK AND THEN DECIDE THE MATT ER AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING THE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE A SSESSEE. SHRI LAXMAN SINGH PAWAR, SINGOT DISTT. KHANDWA VS. CIT(A)-II, INDORE I.T.A.NO. 357/IND/2016 A.Y. 2009- 10 6 6 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OP EN COURT ON 26 TH MAY, 2016, SD/- ( D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 26 TH MAY, 2016. CPU*