THE ITO-1, Ratlam V. SMT. VANDANA BAJPAI, Ratlam

ITA 510/IND/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5847 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 13-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEV JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: QAID KANGSAWALA CAS; T H KHAMOSHI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T.GARASIA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AN D SHRI N.S. SAINI, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 510/IND/2015 (ASST. YEAR : 2011-12) ITO-1, RATLAM VS. SMT. VANDANA BAJPAI L/H & W/O SHRI RAJENDRA BAJPAI 101, SHASTRI NAGAR, RATLAM PAN NO. ABHPB5645C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O.NO.1/IND/2016 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 510/IND/2015) (ASST. YEAR : 2011-12) SMT. VANDANA BAJPAI L/H & W/O SHRI RAJENDRA BAJPAI 101, SHASTRI NAGAR, RATLAM VS. ITO-1, RATLAM PAN NO. ABHPB5645C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJEEV JAIN, DR. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI T.H.KHAMOSHI AND SHRI QAID KANGSAWALA, CAS DATE OF HEARING : 13/07/2016. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13/07/2016. 2 ITO VS. SMT. VANDANA BAJPAI, RATLAM O R D E R PER N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS O BJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), UJJAIN DA TED 30.04.2015. 2. IN THE REVENUES APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENG ED THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 90,38,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK AND DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 45,59,850/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN AGRICULTURE LAND BY ADMIT TING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN VIOLATION OF RULE 46A. 3. IN THE CROSS OBJECTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTEND ED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ERRED IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EV IDENCE IN VIOLATION OF RULE 46A WITHOUT RECORDING ANY REASONS FOR ADMISSIO N OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 4. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSE E DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING ARGUED AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASS ESSMENT WAS FINALIZED BY THE AO U/S 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, UNDER VERY EXCEPTIONAL AND PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN AS MUCH AS THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE LATE SHRI RAJENDRA B AJPAI MET WITH ROAD ACCIDENT AND EXPIRED ON THE SPOT IN NOVEMBER, 2012, HIS FATHER SURYAKANT BAJPAI WHO WAS LOOKING AFTER THE MATTERS OF HIS SON RAJENDRA EXPIRED BY SUDDEN HEART ATTACK IN JUNE 2013 AND FUR THERMORE THE TAX CONSULTANT, C.A. OF LATE SHRI AJAY PAVECHA DIED IN JANUARY 2014, AND UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AT AL L IN A POSITION TO 3 ITO VS. SMT. VANDANA BAJPAI, RATLAM PROPERLY AND ADEQUATELY REPRESENT THE CASE OF HER L ATE HUSBAND RAJENDRA BAJPAI. THE AO HAS COLLECTED INFORMATION R EGARDING BANK ACCOUNTS OF LATE SHRI RAJENDRA BAJPAI FROM THE CONC ERNED BANKS AS WELL AS FROM THE SUB REGISTRAR, RATLAM IN RESPECT OF AGR ICULTURAL LAND PURCHASED BY LATE SHRI RAJENDRA BAJPAI AND ON THE B ASIS OF SUCH INFORMATION MADE HUGE ADDITIONS IN THE INCOME OF TH E ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, WAS ABLE TO PRODUCE BEFORE THE C IT(A) RELEVANT ACCOUNTS FROM THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF LATE SHRI RA JENDRA BAJPAI AS WELL AS INFORMATION REGARDING CASH TRANSACITONS REC ORDED IN THE CASH BOOK AS WELL AS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY LATE SHRI RAJENDRA BAJPAI. AS SUCH, U NDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS STATED ABOVE, THE CIT( A) WAS VALIDLY JUSTIFIED IN ADMITTING SUCH EVIDENCE FOR THE PURPOS E OF PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING FOR FINALIZATION OF THE APPEAL. 5. HOWEVER, HE SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION FI THE MATTER IS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO CONSIDERING THE PEC ULIAR FACTS OF THIS CASE FOR ADJUDICATION AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERING ALL THE EVIDENCES, WHICH THE ASSESSEE MAY FILE BEFORE HIM. 6. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO OBJE CTION TO THE ABOVE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. WE, THEREFORE, SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF LOWER AUTH ORITIES AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO FOR ADJUDI CATION OF THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTU NITY OF HEARING. 4 ITO VS. SMT. VANDANA BAJPAI, RATLAM 8. THUS, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE BOTH ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE H EARING ON WEDNESDAY, THE 13 TH DAY OF JULY, 2016 AT INDORE. SD/- SD/- (D.T.GARASIA) (N.S.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 13 TH JULY, 2016. CPU COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE D.R. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., INDORE 5 ITO VS. SMT. VANDANA BAJPAI, RATLAM