Shri Puran Gawli, Shajapur V. ITO Shajapur, Shajapur

ITA 50/Ind/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8008 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH POWRAL
• Section: 133A

Judgement Text

SMC PURAN GAWLI ITA NO.50 OF 2018 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE SMC BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 50/IND/2018 A.Y. 2011-12 PURAN GAWLI, SHAJAPUR PAN AXVPG 0439 R :: APPELLANT VS ITO-SHAJAPUR :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SHRI ASHISH POWRAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 08.1.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 09.1.2020 O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE O RDER OF LD. CIT(A)-UJJAIN DATED 04.10.2017 ON THE GROUND THAT L D. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,90,000/- AS UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SMC PURAN GAWLI ITA NO.50 OF 2018 2 2. FACTS GIVING RISE TO THE GROUND OF APPEAL ARE TH AT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL CARRYING ON BUSINESS ACTI VITIES OF RUNNING VEHICLE ON HIRE. RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,62,500/- WAS FILED ON 31.3.2012. A SURVEY W AS CONDUCTED ON THE PREMISES OF THIRD PARTY I.E. MR. DILIP PATID AR ON 09.7.2013 U/S 133A WHEREIN A DIARY WAS IMPOUNDED WHICH INCLUD ED HAND WRITTEN RECORD OF MR. DILIP PATIDAR. THE DIARY INCL UDED AN ENTRY OF RS.1,90,000/- WHICH WAS SHOWN TO BE RECEIVED FROM T HE ASSESSEE AS LOAN. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE A DDITION OF RS.1,90,000/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE TREATING THE SAME AS UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ACTION O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFO RE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO CONFIRMED THE ACTION THE ASSESSING OFFI CER. THUS, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. BEFORE ME, THE ASSESSEE OR HIS LEARNED AR DID NO T APPEAR. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE SMC PURAN GAWLI ITA NO.50 OF 2018 3 AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD N OT BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF RS.1,90,000/-. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE FILE . NOBODY REPRESENTED THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEES CASE IS DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECOR D. IF I GO THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), I FIND THAT BE FORE THE LD. CIT(A), IT WAS SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN LOAN TO SHRI DILIP PATIDAR, WHIC H WAS FOUND RECORDED IN THE DOCUMENTS INSPECTED DURING SURVEY P ROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSEE IS ILLITERATE AND LACKS KNOWLEDGE IN A SSESSMENT RELATED MATTERS. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATIO N, THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES OF RUNNING VEHIC LE ON HIRE, FOR WHICH, HE HAD TO REMAIN OUT OF STATION FREQUENTLY. THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD AN ANCESTRAL PROPERTY IN FORM OF RURAL AGR ICULTURE LAND IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. THIS PROPERTY WAS JOINTLY OWNED BY HIM ALONG WITH OTHER FAMILY SMC PURAN GAWLI ITA NO.50 OF 2018 4 MEMBERS. THE TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FOR THIS PROPERTY WAS RS.17,48,000/- WHICH WAS EQUALLY SHARED BY ALL THE CO- OWNERS. THE ASSESSEES 1/5 TH SHARE AMOUNTED TO RS.3,49,600/-. OUT OF THIS RECEIPT ONLY, THE DISPUTED AMOUNT OF RS .1,90,000/- WAS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO SHRI DILIP PATIDAR AS AN A DVANCE. THE COPY OF REGISTRY WAS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFO RE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT APPRECIATE THE SAME AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION STATING THAT THE BURDEN OF P ROOF IS ALWAYS ON THE ASSESSEE. 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF ABOVE FACTS, I FIND THAT IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD AND THE COPY OF THE REGISTRY WAS ALSO FURNISHED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). LD. CIT(A) DI D NOT COMMENT UPON THE REGISTRY AND SIMPLY CONFIRMED THE ADDITION . THEREFORE, IN MY VIEW, WHEN THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY W AS RS.17,48,000/- AND 1/5 TH SHARE AMOUNTED TO RS.3,49,600/- WAS OF THE ASSESSEE, OUT OF THIS RECEIPT ONLY, THE DISPUTE D AMOUNT OF SMC PURAN GAWLI ITA NO.50 OF 2018 5 RS.1,90,000/- WAS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO SHRI DIL IP PATIDAR AS AN ADVANCE, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED T HE SOURCE OF LOAN AMOUNT. THIS FACT SHOULD HAVE BEEN APPRECIATED BY THE LD. CIT(A). BUT THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO CONSIDER THE S AME. THEREFORE, I DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.1,90,000/- . 6. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09.1.2020 . SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 09.1.2020 ! VYAS ! COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PR.CIT(A)/PR.CIT/DR, INDORE SMC PURAN GAWLI ITA NO.50 OF 2018 6