Shri. Sumerchand Tilakchand Agarwal, Pune V. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 8(1), Pune

ITA 504/PUN/2020

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sumerchand Tilakchand Agarwal against the order of the CIT(A)-6, Pune, which confirmed an addition of Rs.9.00 lakh to his income for the assessment year 2011-12 under section 69 of the Income Tax Act. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer (AO) based on information that Agarwal had paid Rs.50.00 lakh in cash for a land deal, which was later returned with a profit of Rs.18.00 lakh. The CIT(A) deleted half of the addition after finding that one of the recipients had admitted to receiving the money, but sustained the remaining half. The Tribunal, after reviewing the declarations made before the Settlement Commission, concluded that the addition was unjustified and allowed Agarwal's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 124147 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 02-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं. /ITA No.504/PUN/2020 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sumerchand Tilakchand Agarwal, Cluster No.4, Bunglow No.8, Near Water Tank, Kumar City, Opp. D Mart, Kalyani Nagar, Pune 411014, Maharashtra PAN : AAYPA0214E Vs. ITO, Ward-8(1), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-6, Pune on 27-02-2020 in relation to the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.9.00 lakh made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.69 of the Act. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the AO received information from the DDIT unit-II(1), Pune that the assessee had paid Rs.50.00 lakh in cash to Shri Rajkumar Agarwal and his associates in Assessee by Shri Prasanna Joshi Revenue by Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav Date of hearing 03-01-2023 Date of pronouncement 03-01-2023 ITA No. 504/PUN/2020 Sumerchand Tilakchand Agarwal 2 the F.Y. 2007-08 against the proposed land deal out of Gut Nos. 148, 149 & 150. Since the deal could not materialize, Shri Rajkumar Agarwal in his statement recorded by the Investigation Wing on 15-04-2014, admitted that the said cash of Rs.50.00 lakh along with profit of Rs.18.00 lakh was repaid to the assessee in the F.Y. 2010-11. As the amount of Rs.50.00 lakh was claimed to have been received in an earlier year which was returned during the year along with profit of Rs.18.00 lakh, the AO made the addition of profit of Rs.18.00 lakh in the assessment order. During the first appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that the alleged recipients of the amount from the assessee owned up the transactions before the Settlement Commission and hence, there was no case of the assessee having paid any amount to them and the consequential income could not be added. The ld. CIT(A) observed that 50% of alleged amount paid by the assessee was owned up by Shri Ajay Kumar Goyal, in whose hands the order of Settlement Commission was available. He, therefore, deleted the addition of Rs.9.00 lakh, being 50% of the profit of total amount of the alleged deposit thereby sustaining the remaining 50%. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Having heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record, it is seen that the ld. CIT(A) accepted the ITA No. 504/PUN/2020 Sumerchand Tilakchand Agarwal 3 contention about the assessee not having given a sum of Rs.50.00 lakh to Shri Rajkumar Agarwal and his associates to the extent of declaration filed by Shri Ajay Kumar Goyal (one of the associates) before the Settlement Commission owning up the amount. They allegedly received a sum of Rs.1.65 crore in total from four persons including the assessee paying Rs.50.00 lakh. Detail of such Rs.1.65 crore has been reproduced at page 4 of the impugned order. Shri Ajay Kumar Goyal, one of the alleged recipients, approached the Settlement Commission and offered 50% of the amount, namely, Rs.82,50,000/- shown as Receivable from others. It is for this amount that the ld. CIT(A) got satisfied and deleted the addition of profit pro tanto. The other person, namely, Shri Subhash R. Agarwal also approached the Settlement Commission under similar facts, owning up Rs.82,50,000/-. A copy of the order passed in his case has been placed at page 21 onwards of the paper book. It is, therefore, apparent that both the alleged recipients of money from the assessee accepted that it was, in fact, their own money which was recorded in the name of certain persons including the assessee. The ld. AR fairly submitted that the order by the Settlement Commissioner in the case of Shri Subhash R. Agarwal was not available when the impugned order was passed, whose copy has now been placed on record. When the facts ITA No. 504/PUN/2020 Sumerchand Tilakchand Agarwal 4 are so, I fail to appreciate as to how the balance addition of Rs.9.00 lakh can be sustained. In view of the foregoing facts, I am satisfied that there is no case for making or sustaining any addition in this regard. The addition so sustained is directed to be deleted. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03 rd January, 2023. Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे Pune; दनांक Dated : 03 rd January, 2023 Satish आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant; 2. यथ / The Respondent; 3. The CIT(A)-6, Pune 4. 5. The Pr.CIT-5. Pune िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, SMC, Pune / DR, ITAT, Pune 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune ITA No. 504/PUN/2020 Sumerchand Tilakchand Agarwal 5 Date 1. Draft dictated on 03-01-2023 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 03-01-2023 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *