SMT. DALJEET KAUR BHATIA, Indore V. THE ITO Ward 1(3), Indore

ITA 544/IND/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6253 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 19-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 20-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: R L AKOTIYA
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE (SINGLE MEMBER CASE) BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NOS.544 & 545/IND/2015 A.Y. : 2001-02 & 2003-04 SMT. DALJEET KAUR BHATIA, ITO, WARD 1(3), INDORE VS. INDORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN NO. AJFPB8276R A PPELLANT S BY : SHRI R.L. AKOTI Y A, C. A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R. A. VERMA, DR O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), UJJAIN, DATED 19.11.2014 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE F ILED THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 148 SHOWING THE AGRICULTUR AL INCOME DATE OF HEARING : 19 .0 4 . 20 16 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 .0 4 . 201 6 I.T.A.NOS. 544 & 545/IND/2015 SMT. DALJEE KAUR BH ATIA VS. ITO, 1(3), INDORE A.YS. 2001-02 & 2003-0 4 2 2 OF RS. 30,000/-. THE STATEMENT OF BOTH THE PERSONS WERE RECORDED BY THE AO. THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT AGREE MENTS WHICH WERE EXECUTED ARE BOGUS. THEREFORE, THE INCOME OF RS. 30,000/- WAS TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AN D TAXED THE INVESTMENT AND EXPENSES OF RS. 4,10,762/- AS IN COME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,10,762/- ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. SIMIL ARLY, IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 20-03-04, THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDI TION ,OF RS. 4,26,050/- AS HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES AS UNDISCLOSE D SOURCES. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPE AL BEFORE CIT(A) AND THEREAFTER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS REJECTED T HE APPEALS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 2. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, WHICH READS AS UNDER : - R / GROUND NO.1 IN THIS CASE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED AMPLE EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. A.O. TO PROVE THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME VIZ. PROOF FOR HOLDING OF I.T.A.NOS. 544 & 545/IND/2015 SMT. DALJEE KAUR BH ATIA VS. ITO, 1(3), INDORE A.YS. 2001-02 & 2003-0 4 3 3 AGRICULTURAL LAND, PROOF REGARDING THE CULTIVATION BY FILLING P2 KHASRA. COPY OF LEASE AGREEMENT AND ALSO PRODUCED TO THE LESSEES WHO HAVE BEEN EXAMINED BY THE LD. AO. AND NOTHING CONTRARY WAS FOUND, WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE ENCLOSED STATEMENTS OF THE LESSEES. THUS THE CONTENTION OF LD. AO. THAT THE EXECUTION OF AGREEMENTS WITH AGRICULTURISTS ARE PREPLANNED IS BASED ON ASSUMPTION PRESUMPTION, DOUBT AND IMAGINATION. GROUND NO.2 [I) THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE LD. AO MERELY FOR THE REASON THAT IN THE REGISTER OF STAMP VENDOR ON THE SERIAL NO. ON WHICH STAMP OF LEASE AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED NAME OF OTHER PERSON IS MENTIONED. IN THIS REGARD IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. AO. FIRSTLY NOT EXAMINED TO THE STAMP VENDOR TO BRING TRUTH, THERE MIGHT BE CLERICAL MISTAKE ON THE PART OF STAMP VENDOR IN MAKING ENTRY IN THE REGISTER. I.T.A.NOS. 544 & 545/IND/2015 SMT. DALJEE KAUR BH ATIA VS. ITO, 1(3), INDORE A.YS. 2001-02 & 2003-0 4 4 4 SECONDLY, THE STAMP WAS NEITHER PURCHASED BY THE APPELLANT NOR BY THE LESSEE SAME IS PURCHASED BY G.S.BHATIA ADVOCATE WHICH WILL BE CLEAR FROM THE REPLY TO THE QUESTION NO.L0 BY LESSEE SHRI JAGDISHCHANDRA AMBARAM RECORDED BY LD. AO. ON 16.12.2009. A COPY OF THE SAME IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH. [II] THE LD. AO. HAS NOT EXAMINED TO G.S. BHATIA ADVOCATE AND JUMPED TO TREAT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS TAXABLE INCOME. (III) IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IF THE STAMP VENDOR COMMITTED ANY MISTAKE OR SUPPLIED FORGED STAMP OR BOGUS STAMP FOR WHICH ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE PENALIZED PARTICULARLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PURCHASED THE STAMP AND HAS MADE AVAILABLE AMPLE EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE AGRICULTURAL LAND IN THE FORM OF P2 KHASRA, WHICH WERE MAINTAINED BY THE STATE GOVT. FOR KEEPING THE RECORD OF AQRICULTURAL LAND UNDER CULTIVATION RIN-PUSTIKA WHICH IS ALSO ISSUED BY I.T.A.NOS. 544 & 545/IND/2015 SMT. DALJEE KAUR BH ATIA VS. ITO, 1(3), INDORE A.YS. 2001-02 & 2003-0 4 5 5 THE STATE GOVT. AND SO ALSO THE COPY OF STATEMENTS RECORDED BY LD. AO. OF THE LESSEES. GROUND NO.3 & 4 IT IS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE WHOLE ADDITION OF OPENING BALANCE OF CAPITAL OF RS.22,75,000/- HAS BEEN DELETED AND TREATED AS GENUINE BALANCE, HENCE THE QUESTION OF MAKING ANY ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CASH SEIZED BY C.B.I. 1 OF RS. 4,10,762/- & RS. 4,26,050/- FOR THE SUBJECT ASSESSMENT YEAR DOES NOT ARISE AND THEREFORE THE ADDITION MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. GRCUNDNO.5 THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE AND PREMATURE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,10,762/- & RS. 4,26,050/- BE DELETED & AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.30,OOO/- & RS.35,000/- EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PROVED AS GENUINE. THEREFORE CANNOT BE TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. I.T.A.NOS. 544 & 545/IND/2015 SMT. DALJEE KAUR BH ATIA VS. ITO, 1(3), INDORE A.YS. 2001-02 & 2003-0 4 6 6 APPELLANT SUBMISSION DATED 17.07.2014: WITH REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE REFERRED APPEAL, IN ADDITION TO THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 16.01.2014 SUBMITTED ALONGWITH NECESSARY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, WE ARE ENCLOSED HEREWITH AN APPEAL ORDER DATED 15.07.2014 PASSED BY HON'BLE I.T.A.T., INDORE S.M.C. BENCH, INDORE, IN THE CASE OF SMT. AGYA KAUR BHATIA WHICH IS SELF-EXPLANATORY AND IDENTICAL CASE BY WHICH THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME HAVE BEEN TREATED AS GENUINE AND THE APPEALS WERE ALLOWED. THEREFORE, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE SAME VIEW SHOULD BE FOLLOWED IN THIS CASE ALSO. FOR OTHER ADDITIONS OUR WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 16.01.2014 MAY PLEASE BE CONSIDERED. 3.