Amit Lamba, Rohtak V. ITO, Rohtak

ITA 3906/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 52829 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-09-2011
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS ANUSHA KHURANA
• Assessee Lawyers: K P GARG
• Keywords: Depreciation; Peak credit; Application of stay; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER STAY APPLICATION NO.90/DEL/2011 (ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 AMIT LAMBA, S/O SHRI SATYAVIR SINGH, 36-R, MODEL TOWN, ROHTAK. PAN : AAZPL4874G VS. ITO, WARD-1, ROHTAK. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K.P. GARG, CA REVENUE BY : MRS. ANUSHA KHURANA, SR. DR ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER IN THE STAY APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT STAY OF OUTSTANDING DEMAND OF ` 1,10,74,806/- ARISING OUT OF ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 24 TH DECEMBER, 2010 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 WHEREBY AN ADDI TION OF ` 2,35,61,039/- WAS MADE IN RESPECT OF BANK DEPOSITS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS WHICH ADDITION WAS PARTL Y SUSTAINED BY LEARNED CIT (A). THE ASSESSEE IN THE STAY APPLICATIO N HAS REQUESTED FOR STAY OF OUTSTANDING DEMAND. THE STAY APPLICATION WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 WHEN THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THAT IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE IF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 2 IS ALSO DECIDED. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE AP PEAL AS WELL AS THE STAY APPLICATION MAY BE TAKEN FOR HEARING ON 26 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL AS WELL AS THE STAY APP LICATION WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 26 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. 2. ON THE 26 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011, THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT SHE IS READY TO ARGUE THE STAY APPLICATION AS WELL AS THE A PPEAL. IN THIS MANNER, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS HEARD. IN V IEW OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE STAY APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS, HENCE, DISMISSED. ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 3. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER I N PART WHICH IS CONTRARY TO LAW, EQUITY AND JUSTICE AND FACTS A ND MATERIAL ON RECORD, ARBITRARY, BASED ON CONJECTURES AN D SURMISES AND PASSED WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND. 2. THE APPELLANT DENIES HIS LIABILITY TO TAX AS UPHELD BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) AND DETERMINED AND COMPUTED BY THE LEA RNED ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE MANNER IN WHICH IT HAS BEEN SO DETERMINED OR COMPUTED. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN SUSTAINING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION INTO THE EXTENT OF RS.1,86,44,289/- AS CASH CREDIT OUT OF THE TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.2,35,61,039/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH CREDIT. 4. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN SUSTAINING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION INTO THE EXTENT OF RS.45,500 UNDER THE HEAD OTHER SOURCES REJECTING AGRICULTURAL INCOME. 4. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR T HAT GROUND NOS.1 AND 2 ARE LEGAL GROUNDS, HENCE, DO NOT REQUIRE SPECIFIC ARGUMENTS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE EFFECTIVE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO GROUND NO.3 IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS AG ITATING THE STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 3 SUSTENANCE OF ADDITION OF ` 1,86,44,289/- IN RESPECT O F CASH CREDITS FOUND IN THE VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE FACT RELATING TO THE SAID ADDITION ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS EARNING INCOME FROM LIC COMMISSION, AND ALSO FR OM ASTROLOGY. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, T HE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO FILE THE DETAILS WITH REGARD TO THE B ANK ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY HIM THE DETAILS OF WHICH HAVE BEEN GIV EN AT PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THAT HAS BEEN COMPILED IN A CHA RT ACCORDING TO WHICH THE TOTAL DEPOSITS IN THOSE BANK ACCOUNTS WERE COMPUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT ` 2,36,46,405/-. THE CHART IS A S UNDER:- S.NO. BANK ACCOUNT NO. NAME OF THE BANK AMOUNT DEPOSITE D BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 1. 01/001330 CORPORATION BANK 85,366/- 2. 083000104548052 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, CIVIL LINES, ROHTAK 66,53,529/- 3. 30017315249 STATE BANK OF INDIA, MODEL TOWN, ROHTAK 30,07,624/- 4. 07412011006026 ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, SONEPAT ROAD, ROHTAK 19,04,167/- 5. 1608685 RBS BANK 76,071/- 6. 1268139543 CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MODEL TOWN, ROHTAK 36,67,104/- 7. 309202010073611 UNION BANK OF INDIA, ROHTAK 37,689/- 8 0176100078787 HDFC 82,14,855/- TOTAL 2,36,46,405/- 5. HE SUBMITTED THAT AS THE CORPORATION BANK ACCOUNT WAS FOUND MENTIONED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE BALANCE AMOU NT OF ` 2,35,61,039/- WAS TREATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNE XPLAINED DEPOSITS IN THE AFOREMENTIONED BANK ACCOUNTS. HE SUBMI TTED THAT ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINING BOOKS OF ACCO UNT. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED B EFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT HE IS INVOLVED IN THE BUSINESS O F PROPERTY STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 4 DEALING WHICH WAS NOT SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DISCLOSE THE AFOREMENTIONED BANK ACCOUNTS. THE REFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS WILLFULLY AND INTENTIONALLY CONCEALED THE TRANSACTIONS OF BANK ACCO UNTS AND IN ABSENCE OF PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION AND AUTHENTICATED DO CUMENTARY EVIDENCE, THE ENTIRE DEPOSITS IN THOSE BANK ACCOUNTS AR E LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED AS INCOME AND ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION WAS MADE. 6. BEFORE THE CIT (A), IT WAS THE CLAIM BY THE ASSESSEE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HE WAS UNDERGOING A ST ATE OF DEPRESSION AND AS ALL THE INFORMATION RELATING TO ASSESSME NT WAS IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF, WHO WAS UNDERGOING A ST ATE OF DEPRESSION WAS NOT ABLE TO RECALL AND COMPILE THE INFO RMATION REQUIRED FOR COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT. THE THEN COUNSEL OF THE A SSESSEE WAS ALSO NOT ABLE TO OFFER ANY EXPLANATION REGARDING VAR IOUS ENTRIES APPEARING IN THE VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE AN D, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNABLE TO EXPLAIN THOSE ENTRIES BEF ORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND, IN THIS MANNER, THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVE NTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM PLACING CERTAIN EVIDENCES TO JUST IFY THE CASE, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A OF THE IT RULES, 1962 VIDE WHICH THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT PERMISSION TO SUB MIT AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF THE DATE-WISE CON SOLIDATED CHART OF ALL THE BANKS, EXCEPT THE CORPORATION BANK OF INDIA; THE EXPLANATION REGARDING ENTRIES FOUND IN ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS; DET AILS OF BANK TRANSFER; DETAILS OF RECAST CASH; DETAILS OF BANK CHARGE S; DETAILS OF ELECTRICITY EXPENSES, ETC. THE SAID LETTER WAS FILED O N 28 TH MARCH, 2011 AND COPY OF THE SAID LETTER IS FILED AT PAGES 160-163 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE SAID INFORMATION WAS FORWARDED BY LEARNED CIT (A) TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH REFERENCE TO THE LETTER OF ASSESSING OFFIC ER ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE IN PURSUANCE OF REMAND REPORT. VIDE LETTER DAT ED 25 TH APRIL, 2011, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER THAT STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 5 DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR THE ASSESSEE WANTED TO MAKE I NVESTMENT IN SOME PROPERTY. THERE WERE NO PARTICULAR CRITERIA AB OUT THE AREA WHERE HE WANTED TO MAKE INVESTMENT, HE MERELY WANTED TO MA KE INVESTMENT OF THE AMOUNT AVAILABLE WITH HIM IN SUCH PROPERTY TH AT COULD BRING HIM GOOD RETURN. THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD HE KEPT LOOKING FOR THE DESIRED PROPERTY FOR WHICH HE MET VARIOUS PROPERTY DEALERS/BU ILDERS/ CONTRACTORS OF WHICH HE DID NOT HAVE ANY RECORD AS TH E MATTER PERTAINS TO LONG BACK AND VIDE LETTER DATED 28 TH APRIL, 2011 THE SAID FACT WAS CLARIFIED TO CIT (A) IN PARA NO.3 IN WHICH THE SAME ACTIVITY WAS STATED TO BE UNDERTAKEN AS UNDER:- .. THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ASSESSEE INTENDED TO BOUGHT PROPERTY AND THEREFORE CONTACTED VARIOU S BROKERS TO BUY THE PROPERTY OF PARTICULAR FEATURE, THERE ARE MANY REASONS BEHIND THE HIGH CIRCULATION OF CASH THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD BUT THE OBJECT BEHIND SO MANY REASONS WAS ONE TH AT WAS PURCHASE OF PROPERTY. ASSESSEE USED TO WITHDRAW CASH FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT WHENEVER HE WENT FOR LOCATING THE PROPERTY, SO THAT HE COULD FINALIZE THE TRANSACTION BY PAYING THE TOKEN MONEY, THE TOKEN MONEY RANGES BETWEEN THE 10% TO 30% DEPENDING UPON THE FEATURES OF PROPERTY, BUT DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO BOUGHT THE SAME AS THE SAME WAS NOT FINALIZED DUE TO MANY FACTS EITHER ASSESSE E FALLS SHORT OF MONEY AT THE TIME OF GIVING TOKEN AMOUNT OR THE FEATURES OF THE PROPERTY WAS SUCH THAT THE INTENDED PURPOS E WITH WHICH THE ASSESSEE WANTED TO PURCHASE THE SAME COUL D NOT MEET.. 7. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY OFFERED ADDITIONAL INCOME TO THE TUNE OF ` 27,54,080/- I.E. , PEAK OF CASH DEPOSIT IN ORDER TO BUY PEACE OF MIND AND, THEREFORE, NO AD VERSE INFERENCE SHOULD BE DRAWN. COPY OF THE SAID LETTER IS FILED AT PAGES 164 AND 165 OF THE PAPER BOOK. COPY OF REMAND REPORT IS FILED A T PAGES 166-170 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD CALLED ASSESSEE TO FILE EXPLANATION DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. IN THE RE MAND REPORT, AFTER REFERRING TO THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, PARTICULARLY THE DETAILS OF BANK TO BANK TRANSFER ENT RIES, IT IS MENTIONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BANK TO BANK ENTRIES ARE FOUND TO BE STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 6 AGGREGATE FOR A SUM OF ` 14,65,557/-. WITH REGARD T O OTHER SUBMISSIONS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING THE ASSESSABILITY OF PEAK AMOUNT AND THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REPOR T ARE AS UNDER:- AS REGARDS THE CASH DEPOSITS & WITHDRAWALS IN VARIOUS BANKS, IT HAS BEEN STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDE R CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE INTENDED TO BOUGHT PROPERTY & THEREFORE, CONTACTED VARIOUS BROKERS TO BUY THE PROPERTY OF PARTICULAR FEATURE. ASSESSEE USED TO WITHDRAW CASH FRO M HIS BANK A/C. WHENEVER HE WENT FOR LOCATING THE PROPERTY, SO THAT HE COULD FINALIZE THE TRANSACTION BY PAYING THE TOKEN MO NEY, BUT DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR, ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO BOU GHT THE SAME & THEREFORE, EVERY TIME ASSESSEE USED TO DEPOSIT TH E CASH INTO THE BANK A/CS AS HE WAS WITHDRAWING FOR PAYING/PA ID AS TOKEN AMOUNT AGAINST THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY * THE ASSES SEE HAS REQUESTED TO ASSESS THE INCOME BY TAKING THE PEAK I .E., RS.23,00,000/- DEPOSITED IN THE CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA ON 22.6.2007. TO VERIFY THIS FACT, ASSESSEE WAS ASKED V IDE THIS OFFICE LETTER DT. 20.4.2011 TO INTIMATE THE DETAILS OF PROP ERTIES WHICH HE WANTED TO PURCHASE, ALSO THE NAMES OF THE OWNE RS, WHOSE PROPERTIES WERE TO BE PURCHASED. IN RESPONSE TO THIS OFFICE LETTER DT. 20.4.2011 THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED IN HI S REPLY DT. 25.4.2011 THAT DURING THE RESPECTIVE FINANCIAL YEAR ASSESSEE WANTED TO INVEST IN SOME PROPERTY, HE MERELY WANTED TO IN VEST THE AMOUNT AVAILABLE WITH HIM IN SUCH PROPERTY THAT COULD BRING HIM GOOD RETURN. THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD HE WAS KEEP LO OKING FOR THE DESIRED PROPERTY FOR WHICH HE MET VARIOUS PROPERTY DEALERS/BUILDERS/CONTRACTORS. IN THIS CONNECTION, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT HE ASSESSEE COULD NOT GIVE EVEN A SINGLE NAME OF THE PROPERTY DEALER TO WHOM HE CONTACTED TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. IT IS VERY STRANGE THA T IN SPITE OF HIS SO-CALLED EFFORTS, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PURCHASE EVEN A SINGLE PROPERTY. FURTHER IN THE REPLY FILED ON 10.12.2010 BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS, IT WAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF LIC AGENCY ASTROLOGY & PROPERTY DEALINGS. THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF I NCOME REVEALS THAT NO INCOME FROM PROPERTY DEALING HAS BEEN DECLARED IN THE RETURN. IN THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ALSO THE ASSE SSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE DETAIL OF ANY PROPERTY INCOME. THERE FORE, THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE THAT HE MADE CASH WITHDRAWALS FOR PURCHASE OF PROPERTY. THEREFORE, IT I S JUST A FAKE & CONCOCTED STORY PREPARED JUST TO EVADE THE TAX INCIDENC E. STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 7 8. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO OBJECTED TO THE PEAK THEOR Y. HOWEVER, WITH REGARD TO THE CLAIM OF EXPENSES OF BANK CHARGES, ELECTRICITY CHARGES, TELEPHONE EXPENSES, INTEREST ON CA R LOAN AND DEPRECIATION OF CAR, ETC., THE ASSESSING OFFICER STATED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE SAID EXPENSES ARE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE FROM THE TOTAL DEPOSITS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE FILED A REJOIND ER AGAINST THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND R EPORT VIDE LETTER DATED 31 ST MAY, 2011 COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN FILED AT PAGES 171- 191 OF THE PAPER BOOK IN WHICH THE ACTION OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER WAS OBJECTED WITH REGARD TO NON-APPLICATION OF PEAK THE ORY. UNDER THESE FACTS, LEARNED CIT (A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE. HE HAS RE JECTED THE OFFER OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING ASSESSABILITY OF PEAK CREDIT TO T HE EXTENT OF `27,54,080/- ALONG WITH AN AMOUNT OF ` 4,31,998/- O N ACCOUNT OF INTEREST, ETC. ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY HIM WITH REGARD TO THE ACTIVITY CARRIED ON BY HIM WITH REGARD TO PURCHASE AND SALE OF PROPERTIES. HOWEVER, HE GRANTED THE BENEFIT OF INTER-BANK TRANSACTION OF ` 1 4,65,557/- AND ALSO THE CLAIM OF EXPENSES TO THE TUNE F ` 3,59,378/- AND, IN THIS MANNER, THE ISSUE HAS BEEN PARTLY DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSE E. 9. AFTER NARRATING THE FACTS, IT WAS VEHEMENTLY PLEAD ED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDERGOING A STATE OF DEPRESSION AND BECAUSE OF THAT FACT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE ANY EXPLANATION WITH R EGARD TO CASH CREDIT ENTRIES FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE . HE SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE INCOME-TAX RETURN FORM, ONL Y ONE BANK ACCOUNT CAN BE STATED, THEREFORE, ONE ACCOUNT WAS STAT ED. HOWEVER, WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE DETAILS REGAR DING BANK ACCOUNTS, THEN, VOLUNTARILY THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED TH E DETAILS WITH REGARD TO ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE AN D HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. THEREFORE, HE PLEADED THAT IT CANNOT BE SAI D THAT THE STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 8 ASSESSEE HAD CONCEALED ANYTHING. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS H AD SUBMITTED VARIOUS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ACCORDING TO WHICH IT WA S SUBMITTED THAT THE MONEY DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS WAS BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD CARRIED ON THE ACTI VITY OF PURCHASING THE PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE AMOUNTS WERE DE POSITED AND WITHDRAWN. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS OWNED ALL THOSE E NTRIES BEING MONEY BELONGING TO HIM. AS NONE OF THE DEALS RELATIN G TO PROPERTY COULD MATURE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBMIT ANY EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE PURCHASE OF ANY PROPERTY AND AS THE MATTER HAD BECOME OLD, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBMIT ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT SUCH CON TENTION. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ENT IRE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT CANNOT BE ASSESSED AS INCOME AS THE P ROPER COURSE WILL BE TO ASSESS THE PEAK CREDIT IN THE BANK ACC OUNTS. THE ASSESSEE HAD DRAWN A CONSOLIDATED ACCOUNT CONTAINING ALL THE BANKS EXCEPT THE CORPORATION BANK WHICH ITSELF WAS EXCLUDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE SAID CONSOL IDATED ACCOUNT IS THAT THERE WAS A PEAK AMOUNT CALCULATED AT ` 27,54,080/- ALONG WITH OTHER DEPOSITS IN THE NATURE OF BANK INTER EST, ETC. AMOUNTING TO ` 4,31,988, TOTAL ADDITIONAL INCOME WAS OFFERED A T ` 31,86,068/- AND HE SUBMITTED THAT SUCH FACT IS RECORDED IN THE ORDER O F THE CIT (A) IN PARA 5.4 AND 5.5 WHICH READ AS UNDER:- 5.4 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, ON THE BASIS OF FAC TUAL DATA AVAILABLE, CASH ACCOUNT HAS BEEN RECAST. AFTER CO NSIDERING THE HIGHEST CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK OF ` 23,00,000/- AND VARIOUS OTHER CASH TRANSACTIONS, ADDITIONAL INCOME IN TH E FORM OF CASH I.E., PEAK OF CASH BOOK COMES TO ` 27,54,080/-, AS FURNISHED IN THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE (PAGE 90 TO 108 & PAGE 137 OF PAPER BOOK). 5.5 IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE, THE CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BA NK A/CS FOR WHICH NO EXPLANATION IS READILY AVAILABLE O R APPARENTLY IN THE NATURE OF BANK INTEREST, ETC. TOTALING ` 4,31,988/- IS ALSO OFFERED AS INCOME MAKING THE TOTAL ADDITIONAL INCOME OF FERED AS ` 31,86,068/- (` 27,54,080 + ` 4,31,988). STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 9 10. HE SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY OTHER ACTIVITY AND HAS NOT MADE ANY INVESTMENT OUT OF THOSE WITHDRAWALS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO COMPILED THE STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES COMPARING THE SAM E WITH IMMEDIATE PRECEDING YEAR AND NET WORTH OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION COMES TO ` 20,71,225.20 AGAINST NE T WORTH OF ` 5,63,358/- FOR THE IMMEDIATE PRECEDING YEAR AND THE NET WORTH OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HAS INCREASED ON LY TO THE EXTENT OF ` 15,07,867.20 AND SUCH INCREASE EVEN AFTER INCLUDING HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AND OTHER DRAWINGS, HOUSE LOAN, ETC., IS TO THE EXTENT OF ` 29,66,244.20. HE, THEREFORE, PLEADED T HAT THE ADDITION, IF ANY, COULD NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNTS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSE E. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT CALCULATION AS FOLLOWS:- AMIT LAMBA AL NO.3906 A.Y 08-09 STATEMENT SHOWING INCREASE IN NET WORTH DURING THE F/Y 2007-08 OVER THE PREVIOUS YEAR ASSETS: ASSETS: ASSETS: ASSETS: 31.03.08 31.03.08 31.03.08 31.03.08 31.03.07 31.03.07 31.03.07 31.03.07 INCREASE DURING INCREASE DURING INCREASE DURING INCREASE DURING 07 0707 07- -- -08 0808 08 CAR-SCORPIO 497,441.00 585,225.00 (87,784.00) SANTRO CAR 332,852.00 228,000.00 104,852.00 INVESTMENT IN HUDA APPLICATION 197,900.00 197,900.00 CURRENT ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS CURRENT ASSETS LOANS & ADVANCES 711,750.00 711,750.00 CASH IN HAND 2,823,998.00 26,900.00 2,797,098.00 BANK A/C 108,587.03 52,961.00 55,626.03 TDS ON COM. 8,583.00 8,583.00 GROSSTOTAL ASSETS 4,681,111.03 893,086.00 3,788,025.03 DEDUCT DEDUCT DEDUCT DEDUCT LIABILITIES LIABILITIES LIABILITIES LIABILITIES SECURED LOANS 298,366.83 329,728.00 (31,361.17) UNSECURED LOANS 2,311,519.00 - 2,311,519.00 TOTAL LIABILITY 2,609,885.83 329,728.00 2,280,157.83 NET WORTH 2,071,225.20 2,071,225.20 2,071,225.20 2,071,225.20 563,358.00 563,358.00 563,358.00 563,358.00 1,507,867.20 1,507,867.20 1,507,867.20 1,507,867.20 HOUSEHOLD EXP. & OTHER DRAWINGS DURING F/Y 07-08 1,3 70,877.00 HOUSING LOAN REPAID IN F/Y 07-08: LOAN 3920 68,500.00 LOAN 4242 19,000.00 MAXIMUM POSSIBLE GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN A/Y 08-09 2,966,244.20 STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 10 11. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CALCULATION REGARDING A SUM OF ` 31,86,068.18 WAS SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E-TAX (APPEALS) VIDE LETTER DATED 28 TH MARCH, 2011 IN PARA NO.7 WHICH WAS ALSO FORWARDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE CIT (A) A ND THE CALCULATION IS AS UNDER:- S.NO. S.NO. S.NO. S.NO. PARTICULARS PARTICULARS PARTICULARS PARTICULARS AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT 1. AMOUNT REFERRED IN PARA 3 SUPRA 2300000 2. AMOUNT REFERRED IN PARA 4 SUPRA 2754080 HIGHEST OF AMOUNT REFERRED IN PARA (3) & (4) 275408 0 3. BANK INTEREST RECEIVED IN VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS EXCEPT CORPORATION BANK 3084.70 4. AMOUNT RECEIVED IN CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA ON 11.12.2007 400000 5. AMOUNT RECEIVED IN ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND ON 19.10.2007 9100 6. AMOUNT RECEIVED IN ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND ON 19.10.2007 561.80 7. AMOUNT RECEIVED IN ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND ON 19.10.2007 319.64 8. AMOUNT RECEIVED IN ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND ON 19.10.2007 22.04 9. COMMISSION INCOME RECEIVED IN HDFC ON 09.07.2007 4000 10. AMOUNT RECEIVED IN HDFC BANK ON 28.09.2007 4900 11. AMOUNT RECEIVED IN HDFC BANK ON 19.10.2007 10000 TOTAL ADDITIONAL INCOME OFFERED 3186068.18 12. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN THE SAME LETTER THE OFFER OF ` 27,54,080/-WAS MADE AS PER PARA 4, WHICH IS REPRODUCE D BELOW:- 4. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO WHATEVER STATED ABOVE IT IS FURTHE R SUBMITTED THAT ON THE BASIS OF ALL THE FACTUAL DATA AVAILAB LE ASSESSEE RECASTED THE INFORMATION AND PREPARED CASH AC COUNT (COPY OF RECASTED CASH ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD UNDER CONSIDERATION IS FORWARDED THROUGH A SEPARATE APPLICATI ON FILES UNDER RULE 46A OF INCOME TAX RULES, 1962, PAGE NO9 0 108..) AFTER CONSIDERING THE HIGHEST CASH DEPOSITED I N THE BANK OF THE ASSESSEE AS REFERRED IN PARA 4 SUPRA AND VARIOUS OTHER CASH TRANSACTIONS BOTH CASH RECEIPTS AND CASH PAYM ENTS AND TRANSACTIONS THROUGH BANK, THE ADDITIONAL INCOME IN THE STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 11 HANDS OF ASSESSEE IN THE FORM OF CASH I.E., PEAK OF CASH BOOK IS CALCULATED AT RS.2754080/-. 13. REFERENCE WAS ALSO MADE BY THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BHAIYALAL SHYAM BEHARI VS. CIT 276 ITR 38 (ALL) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE OBSERVED THAT: IN ORDER TO ADJUDICATE UPON THE PLEA OF PEAK CREDIT THE FACTUAL FOUNDATION HAS TO BE LAID BY THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS TO O WN ALL CASH CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ONLY THE REAFTER CAN THE QUESTION OF PEAK CREDIT BE RAISED. 14. HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION IN THE CA SE OF DR. M. SOMASHEKAR VS. ACIT (2010) 5 ITR (TRIB) 129 (BANGALOR E) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT IF IT IS A CASE OF REGULAR AND CIRCULAR MONEY TRANSACTIONS, THEN IT IS LEGITIMATE FOR THE ASSESSEE TO ARGUE THAT THE CASH FOUND IN THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS WITHDRAWALS MADE FOR THE EXPENSES ARE NOT INDEPENDENT FUNDS BUT RECEIVED THROUG H BANK TRANSACTIONS. REPEATED CASH TRANSACTIONS OF DEPOSITS, WIT HDRAWALS, RE- DEPOSITS AND RE-WITHDRAWALS MADE TIME AND AGAIN FROM T HE VERY SAME STOCK OF CASH RESULTING IN HUGE CASH TURNOVER, HAVE NOT BEEN RECONCILED. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, EACH AND EVERY ITE M OF DEPOSIT AND WITHDRAWAL CANNOT SAFELY BE TREATED AS AN INDEPENDENT ITEM OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND ADDED SEVERALLY. RECONCILIATIO N MUST BE THERE. SUCH NEW AND SEVERAL ADDITIONS, IF MADE WITHO UT RECONCILIATION, THE ADDITIONS MIGHT RESULT IN MULTIPLE DUPLICATIONS. 15. THUS, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT AS TH E ASSESSEE HAS OWNED ALL THE CASH CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCO UNT, THE ASSESSEE HAS WRONGLY BEEN DENIED THE BENEFIT OF PEAK CREDIT W HICH HAS ALREADY BEEN OFFERED TO TAX AND THE CALCULATION OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING PEAK CASH CREDIT HAS NOT BEEN DOUBTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR CIT (A). HE FURTHER PLACED ON RECORD THE SUMMARY OF THESE BANK ACCOUNTS IN STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 12 THE SHAPE OF OPENING BALANCE NET TRANSACTIONS AND CLOSI NG BALANCE WHICH READ AS UNDER:- BANK ACCOUNTS GROUP SUMMARY 1 APR 2007 TO 31-MAR-2008 PARTICULARS OPENING BALANCE NET TRANSACTIONS CLOSING BALANCE CBI MODEL TOWN, RTK 1268139543 1,994.87 DR 1,003.00 DR 2,997.87 DR CORPORATION BANK (1330) 12,128.00 DR 6,453.00 CR 5,675.00 DR HDFC (01761000078787) 5,007.66 DR 69,178.54 DR 74,186.20 DR HDFC-01761000095700 5,053.38 DR 46.62 DR 5,100.00 DR OBC (07412011006026) 19,044.00 DR 17,852.00 CR 1,192.00 DR PNB (0838000104548052) 1,160.00 DR 60.00 CR 1,100.00 DR RBS 1608685 11,064.87 DR 11,064.87 DR SBI (30017315249) 4,800.00 DR 282.00 DR 5,082.00 DR STATE BANK OF PATIALA 1,068.00 DR 52.00 DR 1,120.00 DR UBI (736121) 2,705.09 DR 1,636.00 CR 1,069.09 DR GRAND TOTAL 52,961.00 DR 55,626.03 DR 1,08,587.03 DR 16. IN THIS MANNER THE LEARNED AR PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE CONSIDERED FOR BENEFIT OF PEAK ADDITION WITH REGARD TO BANK DEPOSITS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNTS. 17. APROPOS GROUND NO.4, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THA T THE ONLY EVIDENCE WHICH HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TO SUPPORT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME IS COPY OF FORM NO. J, WHICH IS F ILED AT PAGE 137 WHICH IS ISSUED BY YADAV SALES, 141, NEW ANAJ MANDI, RE WARI, IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE FOR A SUM OF ` 65,000/- AND IS DATED 17 TH APRIL, 2007. HE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS ANCESTRAL AGRICULTURAL LAN D OUT OF WHICH THE AFOREMENTIONED AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE WAS SOL D IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE NET INCOME WAS SHOWN IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTE D THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING AGRICULTURAL INCOME SHOU LD BE ACCEPTED. 18. ON THE OTHER HAND, RELYING UPON THE ORDER OF ASSE SSING OFFICER AND CIT (A), IT WAS VEHEMENTLY PLEADED BY THE LEARNE D DR THAT THE STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 13 THEORY OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING APPLICATION OF PEAK CR EDIT CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE HIS EXPLANA TION REGARDING HIS ACTIVITY OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF PROPERT IES. SHE SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS BEEN CLEARLY BROUGHT OUT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT (A) THAT DESPITE HAVING FREQUENT DE POSITS AND WITHDRAWALS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WHICH ARE STATED TO B E ON ACCOUNT OF PROPERTY DEALING, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BRING ON RECOR D ANY MATERIAL WHATSOEVER TO SUGGEST THAT HE WAS REALLY ENGAGED IN SUCH TYPE OF ACTIVITY. SHE SUBMITTED THAT IT IS BEYOND HUMAN PROB ABILITIES TO ACCEPT SUCH PROPOSITION LAID DOWN BY THE ASSESSEE THAT NOT EVEN A SINGLE DEAL OF PROPERTY WAS MATURED DESPITE MAKING SO MANY TRANSACT IONS BY DEPOSITING AND WITHDRAWING THE CASH FROM THE BANK ACC OUNTS. SHE SUBMITTED THAT THOSE BANK ACCOUNTS WERE NEVER DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AND, THUS, THE ENTIRE D EPOSITS IN THOSE BANK ACCOUNTS REPRESENT THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE A SSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, LEARNED CIT (A) HAS RIGHTLY UPHELD THE AD DITION AND GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 19. COMING TO ANOTHER ISSUE OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME, SH E SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY EVIDENCE WHICH HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS COPY OF FORM J. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBMIT THE PARTI CULARS ABOUT THE LAND FROM WHICH SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN EARNED AND I N THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE OF EITHER OWNERSHIP OF THE AGRICULTU RAL LAND AND QUANTIFICATION THEREOF, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE REGAR DING AGRICULTURAL INCOME HAS RIGHTLY BEEN REJECTED BY LEARNED CIT (A) AND THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD ALSO BE DISMISSED. 20. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS I N THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT O UT BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT (A) THAT THE EXPLANATION COULD NOT B E FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS T HE ASSESSEE WAS IN THE STATE OF DEPRESSION. BEFORE CIT (A) THE ASSESSEE STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 14 HAD SUBMITTED THE CONSOLIDATED DAY-TO-DAY PARTICULARS WITH REGARD TO ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE ENTIRE DEPOSITS HAVE BEEN TREATED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE H AS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT TRANSACTIONS TO THE TUNE OF ` 14,65,55 7/-, WERE BANK TO BANK TRANSACTIONS AND SUCH CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE HAS A LSO BEEN FOUND TO BE CORRECT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THUS, WHAT EVER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO COMPUTE THE PEAK AND OTHER FIGURES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EVEN EXPRESSED ANY DOUBT ON THAT . THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING APPLICATION OF PEAK THE ORY HAS BEEN REJECTED ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REMAINED UN ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS EXPLANATION REGARDING ACTIVITY OF SALE AND PURCHASE OF PROPERTY FOR WHICH THE WITHDRAWALS AND DEPOSITS WERE M ADE IN THOSE BANK ACCOUNTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS OWNED THOSE TRANSACTIONS AN D IT HAS BEEN CLEARLY STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE MONEY DEPOSI TED IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS BELONGS TO HIM. SO, IT IS NOT A CASE WHE RE THE ASSESSEE IS STILL ALLEGING THAT THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BAN K ACCOUNTS RELATES TO SOME PARTICULAR CREDITOR OR DEPOSITOR. IT IS ALSO T HE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAS NOT MADE ANY INVESTMENT IN ANY OTHER ASSET. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED COMPARABLE CHART SHOWING THE INCRE ASE IN NET WORTH AS AT THE END OF RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR AND H AS COMPARED IT WITH IMMEDIATE PRECEDING YEAR. SUCH CHART HAS REVEALED T HAT THE NET WORTH OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT EXCEED THE INCOME OFFERED ON TH E BASIS OF PEAK CREDIT. THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT THE WITHDRAWALS FROM THOSE BANK ACCOUNTS WE RE UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ANY OTHER MANNER EXCEPT RE-DEPOSITING THE SAME IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. IF THE ASSESSEE IS ASKING FOR ADDITION TO BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF PEAK CREDIT AND ALL THE RELEVANT PART ICULARS ARE GIVEN, THEN, IN ORDER TO HOLD THAT THE BENEFIT OF WITHDRAW ALS CANNOT BE GIVEN FOR REDEPOSIT THEREOF SOME MATERIAL HAS TO BE BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE AMOUNT WITHDRAWN WAS UTILIZED SOMEWHERE ELSE. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE, KEEPIN G IN VIEW THE STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 15 ADMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ENTIRE MONEY BELONGS TO HIM, IT HAS TO BE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF ADDITION OF PEAK CREDIT. SINCE THERE IS NO DOUBT REGARDING THE CALCULATION OF PEAK AMOUNT, THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF PEAK OF ` 31, 86,068/- IS UPHELD. IT MAY BE MENTIONED HERE THAT AS THE ADDITION IS UPHE LD ON THE BASIS OF PEAK CREDIT ONLY, THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO ADDITIONAL BENEFIT ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES FOR WHICH THE RELIEF HAS BEEN G IVEN BY THE CIT (A) TO THE TUNE OF ` 3,59,378/- AS THE SAID BENEFIT W AS GIVEN IN VIEW OF THE ADDITION UPHELD IN RESPECT OF ENTIRE DEPOSITS. IT MAY ALSO BE MENTIONED HERE THAT BANK TO BANK TRANSACTIONS HAVE AL READY BEEN EXCLUDED BY LEARNED CIT (A) TO THE EXTENT OF ` 14,6 5,557/-, BUT THE EXCLUSION THEREOF WILL HAVE NO IMPACT UPON THE PEAK CALCULATED BY THE ASSESSEE AS ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF PEAK CREDIT WILL R EMAIN. IN OTHER WORDS, THE ADDITION WHICH HAS TO BE UPHELD IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNTS IS A SUM OF ` 31,86,068/- IN PLACE O F ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE EXTENT OF ` 2,35,61,039 /-. THE GROUND NO.3 OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 21. NOW, COMING TO GROUND NO.4, IT HAS ALREADY BEEN OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED EVIDENCE ONLY IN THE SHAPE OF F ORM NO.J WHICH, IN OUR OPINION, IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH T HE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED ANY AGRICULTURAL INCOME. NO EVIDENC E WHATSOEVER HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD REGARDING OWNERSHIP OF CUL TIVATION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. THEREFORE, WE FIND NO MERIT IN THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE AND IT IS HELD THAT LEARNED CIT (A) HAS RIGHTLY UPHELD THE ADDITION BECAUSE NO REASONABLE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FURNI SHED BY THE ASSESSEE ON RECORD TO SUBSTANTIATE THE EARNING OF AGRICUL TURAL INCOME. THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. STAY NO.90/DEL/2011 ITA NO.3906/DEL/2011 16 22. IN THE RESULT, THE STAY APPLICATION IS DISMISSED BEI NG INFRUCTUOUS AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED I N THE MANNER AFORESAID. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14.10.20 11. SD/- SD/- [K.G. BANSAL] [I.P. BANSAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED, 14.10.2011. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES