The Income tax Officer, Amritsar. V. Sh. Amarbir Singh, Amritsar.

ITA 48/ASR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 63448 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 22-08-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIK CHAND
• Assessee Lawyers: K R JAIN
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.48(ASR)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 PAN :AQKPS9675F THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SH. AMARBIR SINGH WARD V(1), AMRITSAR. S/O SH. GURDIP SINGH, VPO GUMTALA, AMRITSAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:SH. AMRIK CHAND, DR RESPONDENT BY:SH. K.R. JAIN, ADV. DATE OF HEARING:22.08.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:23/08/2012 ORDER PER BENCH ; THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINS T THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A), AMRITSAR, DATED 03.11.2010 REL ATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) AMRITSAR HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.9 ,49,500/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEP OSIT IN THE BANK BY THE ASSESSEE TREATING THE SAME AS PERTAININ G TO HUF. ITA NO.48(ASR)/2011 2 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) AMRITSAR HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.25,89,370/ - MADE BY THE A.O. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) AMRITSAR HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITIONS BY OBSERVING T HAT THE LAND IN QUESTION PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE STATUS OF HUF WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FU RNISH ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE A.O. THAT THIS LAND BELONGS TO HUF. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AMRITSAR BE VACATED AND THAT OF THE A.O. BE RESTORED. 5. APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR ADD ANY OR MORE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL. 2. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.03.2007 DECLARING INCOME OF RS.96,000/- AND THE SAME WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT ON 16.05.2007. LATER ON, CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THE AO ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT, WHICH WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE ON 21.08.2007. NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2)/142(1) ALON GWITH QUESTIONNAIRE WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED. THE AO ASK ED THE ASSESSEE EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK IN CENTURIO N BANK OF PUNJAB LIMITED, AMRITSAR AND IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS REPLY BY STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN AGRICULTURIST AND HE IS PLA NNING TO GO ABROAD. HE ALSO PLEADED THAT IMMIGRATION CONSULTANT GUIDED HIM THAT IF HE HAS OPERATED THIS BANK ACCOUNT WITH MAXIMUM TRANSACTIONS THEN IT WILL HELPFUL FOR VISA PURPOSE. SO THE ASSESSEE OPERATED TWO ACCOUNTS JOI NTLY WITH HIS SON ITA NO.48(ASR)/2011 3 BAKHTAWAR SINGH WITH CENTURION BANK OF PUNJAB LIMIT ED AND HE MAINLY OPERATES THESE TWO ACCOUNTS. AS PER GUIDANCE OF IMM IGRATION CONSULTANT THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWS CASH FROM ONE ACCOUNT AND DE POSITED IN ANOTHER ACCOUNT VICE VERSA DURING THE YEAR 01.04.2005 TO 31 .03.2006. HE FURTHER STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD ELEVEN PIECE OF A GRICULTURAL LAND AND SALE PROCEEDS OF THE SAME WAS DEPOSITED IN THEIR TWO BAN K ACCOUNTS. THEREFORE, THERE ARE NO UNEXPLAINED INCOME GAINED BY THE ASSE SSEE DURING THIS PERIOD FROM ANY BUSINESS WHICH IS TAXABLE UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTURE PRODUCE ALSO DEPOSITED IN THESE TWO BANK ACCOUNTS AND THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED DOCUMENTARY EV IDENCE SUPPORTING THE AFORESAID CONTENTION BEFORE THE A.O. AFTER CONSIDER ING THE SAME, THE AO FINALLY COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT BY MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS INCLUDING THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE VIDE ORDER DATED 26.12.2008 U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APP EAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO VIDE HIS IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.11.20 10 PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY MAINLY HOLDING THAT THE A MOUNT OF RS.9,49,500/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACC OUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS SON REPRESENTS SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTURE LAN D AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCES. THE AGRICULTURE INCOME AND THE BANK ACCOU NTS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAME ANALOGY BELONGS TO THE HUF AND THE LD. CIT (A) FINALLY DELETED THE ITA NO.48(ASR)/2011 4 ADDITION OF RS.9,49,500/- IN THE STATUS OF AN INDIV IDUAL AND ADDED TO THE HUF. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.11.2010 , THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THIS BENCH AND CHAL LENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.9,49,500/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND T REATED THE SAME BY THE LD. CIT(A) AS PERTAINING TO HUF. THE REVENUE HAS ALSO C HALLENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.25,89,370/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON A CCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ASSESSED IN THE STATUS OF INDIVIDUAL. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. DR, RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O. AND ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE WITH US, ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS WELL AS SMALL PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTAININ G PAGES 1 TO 26 IN WHICH HE HAS ATTACHED VARIOUS ORDERS PASSED BY THE ITAT, BAN GALORE BENCH, ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH AND JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY THE HONB LE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. BACHU LAL KAPOOR 60 ITR 74 ( SC). THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED A COY OF NOTICE UNDER S ECTION 148 OF THE ACT, WHICH IS AT PAGE 25 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND STATED TH AT THE ITO WARD 5(1), ITA NO.48(ASR)/2011 5 AMRITSAR, HAS ALSO ISSUED NOTICE TO THE HUF. WE HAV E HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION BY APPRECIATING THE EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION SOLD DURING THE YE AR BY THE ASSESSEE BELONGED TO THE HUF AND AS A NATURAL COROLLARY THE INCOME ARISING THEREFROM ALSO BELONGED TO THE HUF OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFOR E, THE INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS.25,89,370/- ASSESSED IN THE STATUS OF INDIVID UAL IN RESPECT OF THIS PROPERTY UNDER THE INCOME FROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GA INS HAS RIGHTLY BEEN DELETED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE LD. F IRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ALSO THOROUGHLY PERUSED THE REVENUE RECORD FILED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATING TO THE SOLD AGRICULTURE LAND WHICH SHOWED THAT THE REV ENUE RECORD IS ALSO ESTABLISHING THAT THE PROPERTY IN DISPUTE IS ANCES TRAL LAND AND THE LAND IN QUESTION HAS BEEN RECEIVED/INHERITED FROM ASSESSEE S ANCESTRAL IS HUF PROPERTY AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF HUF. AS REGARDS DELETION OF RS.9,49,500/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS SON, THE LD. F IRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ALSO RIGHTLY DELETED THE SAME IN THE HANDS OF INDIV IDUAL AND TREATED THE SAME IN THE HANDS OF HUF ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTARY EVI DENCE, WHICH THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS MENTIONED IN THE IMPU GNED ORDER IN DETAIL. ITA NO.48(ASR)/2011 6 7. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE EXPLAINED ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY . THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY TH E REVENUE. 8 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IN ITA NO.48(ASR)/2011 IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23RD AUGUST, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 23 RD AUGUST, 2012 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SH. AMARBIR SINGH, AMRITSAR. 2. THE ITO WARD 5(1), AMRITSAR. 3. THE CIT(A), ASR 4. THE CIT, ASR 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.