The ITO, 3(2), V. Shri Dharmandra Singh Raghuwanshi,

ITA 471/IND/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6030 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 15-03-2010
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2007
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APARNA KARAN
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 6 - I.T.A.NO. 471/IND/2007 SHRI DHARMENDRA SINGH RAGHUWANSHI, BHOPAL. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH : INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PAN NO. : ADKPS6956J I.T.A.NO.471/IND/2007 A.Y. : 2003-04 ITO, SHRI DHARMNDRA SINGH RAGHUWANSHI, 3(2), VS B-287, MANSAROVAR COLONY, BHOPAL SHAHPURA, BHOPAL. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SMT. APARNA KARAN, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 15.03.2010 O R D E R PER BENCH THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A)-II, BHOPAL, DATED 6.7.2007 FOR ASSESSMENT YE AR 2003-04. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE ALSO PERUSE D THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER :- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN PAGE 2 OF 6 - I.T.A.NO. 471/IND/2007 SHRI DHARMENDRA SINGH RAGHUWANSHI, BHOPAL. 1) ALLOWING RELIEF OF RS. 2,97,420/- ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES, WHICH HAD RIGHTLY BEEN ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2) ALLOWING RELIEF OF RS. 2,40,000/-ON ACCOUNT OF REPAYMENT OF LOAN. 3) ALLOWING RELIEF OF RS. 1,86,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF RECEIPTS FROM TRUBA COLLEGE WHICH HAD RIGHTLY BEEN ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. AS REGARD TO GROUND NO.1, THE FACTS, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE A.O. MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION FOR THE REASONS THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE EVIDENCE OF AGRICULTURE LAND TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 27 ACRES AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE EXCEPT AN AFFIDAVIT AND IN THE EARLIER YEARS, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT SHOWN ANY AGRICULTURE INCOME. IN D OING SO, THE A.O. ALSO REJECTED VARIOUS CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AS REG ARD TO HOLDINGS OF THE AGRICULTURE LAND BY THE FAMILY OF THE ASSESSEE. THE A.O., ACCORDINGLY, ACCEPTED LAND AT 5.04 ACRES AND ESTIMATED YIELD @ R S. 5,000/- PER ACRE AND WORKED OUT THE AGRICULTURE INCOME AT RS. 25,414 /- AS AGAINST RS. 3,50,000/- DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED THE BALANCE AMOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER INTO APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHEREIN VARIOUS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WERE PAGE 3 OF 6 - I.T.A.NO. 471/IND/2007 SHRI DHARMENDRA SINGH RAGHUWANSHI, BHOPAL. FURTHER FILED TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. THE LD. CI T(A) ADMITTED THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND REQUIRED THE A.O. TO SUBMI T THEREON. HOWEVER, THE A.O. MERELY REITERATED THE STAND TAKEN IN THE C OURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, HE LD THAT ONCE AN AFFIDAVIT HAD BEEN FILED, THE A.O. WAS DUTY BOUND T O VERIFY THE CONTENTS THEREOF AND THE A.O. SHOULD HAVE ALSO LOOKED UPON T O EXAMINE THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES, WHICH INDICATED THAT THE ASS ESSEE WAS HAVING A TOTAL AGRICULTURE LAND AT HIS DISPOSAL TO THE TUNE OF RS. 49.57 ACRES AND HELD THAT AGRICULTURE INCOME @ RS. 6,000/- PER ACRE WAS REASONABLE. ACCORDINGLY, HE WORKED OUT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS. 2,97,420/- AND REDUCED THE ADDITION TO RS. 52,580/- ONLY. AGGRIEVE D BY THIS, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. THE LD. DR NARRATED THE FACTS AND PLACED RELIANCE O N THE ORDER OF THE AO. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OT HER HAND, PLACED STRONG RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BOTH THE SIDES, MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW. 8. IT IS NOTED THAT THE LAND HOLDINGS TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 49.57 ACRES IS NOT IN DISPUTE AND THE PER ACRE YIELD ADOPTED BY THE CIT(A) IS ALSO REASONABLE HAVING REGARD TO THE NATURE OF AGRICULTU RE CROP, HENCE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). PAGE 4 OF 6 - I.T.A.NO. 471/IND/2007 SHRI DHARMENDRA SINGH RAGHUWANSHI, BHOPAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE SAME. THUS, THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 9. AS REGARD TO GROUND NO.2, THE FACTS, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAVE GIVEN RS. 2.40 LAKHS TO HI S WIFE AS LOAN. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTAR Y EVIDENCES AS REQUIRED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOR COPY OF THE B ANK STATEMENT WAS FURNISHED. HENCE, HE TREATED THE SAME TRANSACTION A S BOGUS AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY TH IS, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER INTO APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ), WHEREIN IT WAS CONTENDED THAT REQUIRED DETAILS WERE FILED BEFORE T HE A.O., HOWEVER, THE A.O. WAS BENT UPON TO MAKE THIS ADDITION. THE COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS ALSO FURNISHED. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT IT W AS REPAYMENT OF LOAN TAKEN FROM THE WIFE EARLIER. THE LD. CIT(A), AGREEI NG WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, DELETED THE ADDITION. 10. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 11. THE LD. DR NARRATED THE FACTS AND PLACED RELIANCE O N THE ORDER OF THE AO. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OT HER HAND, PLACED STRONG RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 12. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BOTH THE SIDES, MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW. PAGE 5 OF 6 - I.T.A.NO. 471/IND/2007 SHRI DHARMENDRA SINGH RAGHUWANSHI, BHOPAL. 13. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE FIND THAT THE IMPUGNED TRANSACTION DULY BEEN EXPLAI NED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) HAVE REMA INED UNCONTROVERTED. HENCE, WE CONFIRM THE SAME. ACCORDI NGLY, THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS ALSO DISMISSED. 14. AS REGARD TO GROUND NO. 3, THE A.O., IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOUND THAT A SUM OF RS. 1.86 LAKHS HAD BEEN CREDITED IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM TURBA COLLEGE. HOWEVER, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE EVIDENCES TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS CLAIM, THE A.O. ADDED THE SAME AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THAT REQUIRED DETAILS WERE FILED, BUT THE A.O.S ACTION WAS PRE-DECIDED. THE ASSESSEE AGAIN SUBMITTED THAT THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDE NCES TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM OF LOAN RECEIVED FROM TURBA COLLEGE. THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER APPRAISING THE SAME DELETED THE ADDITION. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 15. THE LD. DR NARRATED THE FACTS AND PLACED RELIANCE O N THE ORDER OF THE AO. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OT HER HAND, PLACED STRONG RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 16. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BOTH THE SIDES, MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW. PAGE 6 OF 6 - I.T.A.NO. 471/IND/2007 SHRI DHARMENDRA SINGH RAGHUWANSHI, BHOPAL. 17. IT IS NOTED THAT THE IMPUGNED TRANSACTION ON LAND H AS DULY BEEN EXPLAINED WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, HENCE, IT WOUL D BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. THUS, THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS ALSO DISMISSED. 18. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH MARCH, 2010. SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (V. K. GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 15 TH MARCH, 2010. CPU*