Sh. Irfon Khan Prop. M/s Ocean Traders &, Aligarh V. I.T.O., Ward-3, Aligarh

ITA 552/AGR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0371 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 26-02-2013
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KK MISHRA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Gift
• Section: 148; 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-06 SHRI IRFAN KHAN, VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, PROP. M/S. OCEAN TRADERS & IND. WARD -3, ALIGARH . 6/687, NAI BASTI, ALIGARH. (PAN: ADBPK 5937 E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.K. MISHRA, JR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 26.02.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 28.02.2013 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), GHAZIABAD DATED 17.10.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS.33,50,000/- U/S. 69 OF THE IT ACT. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE T IME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. HOWEVER, WRITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 25.02.2013 SIGNED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD WHICH IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 2 3. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT SHRI ANW AR JALIL AHMAD KHAN, C-34, ZAKIR BAGH, NEW DELHI INFORMED THE INCOME-TAX DEPAR TMENT ABOUT THE SALE AGREEMENT OF RS.33,50,000/- ENTERED INTO BY HIM WIT H THE ASSESSEE ON 25.08.2004, THROUGH WHICH HE HAS RECEIVED AMOUNT OF RS.33,50,00 0/- IN CASH TOWARDS THE SALE CONSIDERATION IN RESPECT OF SALE OF HIS RESIDENTIAL HOUSE PROPERTY, NAMELY ANWAR VILLA AT 4/447, AMIR NISHAN, DODHPUR, ALIGARH. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE IN THE NAME OF PROPOSED SALE DEED GOT FRAU DULENTLY MATERIALIZED THE SAME ON 20.03.2006 THROUGH INSTRUMENT OF HIBENAMA, I.E ., GIFT DEED REGISTERED IN FAVOUR OF WIFE OF ASSESSEE SMT. HINA KAUSAR AND SMT . SHAHEEN KHAN, WIFE OF THE BROTHER OF ASSESSEE SHRI IRSHAD KHAN. IT IS STATED THAT SINCE SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.33,50,000/- WAS RECEIVED BY SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHM AD KHAN FROM THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL AND THE ASS ESSEE HAS FAILED TO DISCLOSE THIS INVESTMENT IN HIS INCOME-TAX RETURN, THEREFORE, PRO CEEDINGS U/S. 148 WERE INITIATED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE FOR ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 148 FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING THE INCOM E OF RS.41,392/- ACCORDING TO SECTION 44AF OF THE IT ACT. THE STATUTORY NOTICES W ERE ISSUED FOR COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT. THE ASSESSEE IN HIS REPLY DENIED TO HAV E EXECUTED THE AGREEMENT IN QUESTION OR MAKING CASH PAYMENT ON 25.08.2004. IN O RDER TO VERIFY THE CORRECTNESS OF THE CONTENTION OF SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN, L ETTER WAS WRITTEN TO HIM TO FILE HIS REPLY IN WHICH HE HAS CONFIRMED THE FORGERY COM MITTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR FRAUDULENTLY GETTING THE GIFT DEED EXECUTED IN FAVO UR OF HIS WIFE AND WIFE OF HIS ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 3 BROTHER. HE HAS DENIED TO KNOW THESE TWO LADIES AND EXPLAINED THAT RECEIPT DATED 25.08.2004 OF RS.10,00,000/- WAS FOR ADVANCE TOWARD S AGREEMENT TO SALE AND THAT WHATEVER APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY HIM BEFORE T HE REVENUE DEPARTMENT IS CORRECT. THE AO REQUIRED SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHA N TO APPEAR BEFORE HIM AND TO FILE THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS AND AS TO WHAT STEPS HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY HIM FOR GETTING GIFT DEED VOID AS PER LAW. SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN APPEARED BEFORE THE AO IN PURSUANCE TO THE STATUTORY NOTICE AND FIL ED THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS IN RESPECT OF SALE OF HIS HOUSE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSES SEE AND THE DOCUMENTS WERE COPY OF POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED ON 24.08.2004 IN FAVO UR OF SHRI IRSHAD KHAN, YOUNGER BROTHER OF ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION, WHICH WAS ALSO REGISTERED WITH THE SUB-REGISTRAR, ALIGARH, CO PY OF RECEIPT DATED 25.08.2004 FOR GIVING OF CASH AMOUNT OF RS.33,50,000/- BY THE ASSESSEE TO SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN AS SALE CONSIDERATION OF SALE OF PROPERT Y MEASURING 1210 SQ. YARDS, ANOTHER RECEIPT DATED 20.03.2006 GIVEN BY SHRI ANWA R JALIL AHMAD KHAN TO SHRI IRSHAD KHAND, THE BROTHER OF ASSESSEE FOR SALE CONS IDERATION OF RS.10,00,000/- FOR SALE OF 142 SQ. YARDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTED PORTION I NSIDE THE SAME PROPERTY SOLD TO THE ASSESSEE AND AS PER THIS RECEIPT BALANCE OF RS. 5,00,000/- REMAINED TO BE PAID BY SHRI IRSHAD KHAND, THE BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE WHIC H WAS ALSO DULY REGISTERED ON 21.03.2006, COPY OF THE CIVIL SUIT FILED BY SHRI AN WAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN, CHALLENGING THE GIFT DEED IN FAVOUR OF THESE TWO LA DIES, COPY OF HIS BANK ACCOUNT SHOWING RECEIPT OF RS.33,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF SAL E CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FROM ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 4 THE ASSESSEE. THE STATEMENT ON OATH OF SHRI ANWAR J ALIL AHMAD KHAN WAS RECORDED IN WHICH HE HAS CONFIRMED DOCUMENTS FILED BY HIM ON RECORD FOR RECEIPT OF RS.33,50,000/-. COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS AND STATEME NT RECORDED OF SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN WERE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSE E ON 17.12.2011 AND THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO GIVE HIS REBUTTAL/EXPLANAT ION/COUNTER COMMENTS ON THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS. THE ASSESSEE DENIED TO HAVE EXECUT ED ANY AGREEMENT TO SALE OR RECEIPTS FOR PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO SUMMONED BY THE AO FOR EXAMINATION AND REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO CALLED FOR IN WHICH HE HAS DENIED HIS SIGNATURE ON THE RECEIPT IN QUESTION OR GIVING OF ANY ADVANCE OR CASH PAYMENT OF RS.33,50,000/-. HE HAS ADMITTED THE PEND ENCY OF THE MATTER OF CANCELLATION OF GIFT DEED BEFORE THE CIVIL COURT. H E HAS ADMITTED RECEIPT OF RS.5,00,000/- WHICH HAS BEEN PAID AT THE TIME OF RE GISTRY THROUGH CHEQUES. THE AO EXAMINED ALL THE DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENT OF THE PAR TIES IN DETAIL AND FOUND THAT THE SO CALLED GIFT IS REGISTERED WITH THE SUB-REGIS TRAR, ALIGARH IN FAVOUR OF WIFE OF ASSESSEE AND WIFE OF HIS BROTHER. THE AO, THEREFORE , FOUND THAT THE ENTIRE ARRANGEMENT WAS NOTHING BUT A COLOURABLE DEVICE TO SIPHON OFF UNACCOUNTED FUND OF ASSESSEE FOR PURCHASING THE PROPERTY THROUGH SO CALLED GIFT DEED. THE STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE, HIS WIFE AND WIFE OF HIS BROTHER WERE ALSO RECORDED. THE AO ON EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD FOUND THAT TH E GIFT INVOLVES NO CONSIDERATION, BUT IT INVOLVES CONSIDERATION OF LOV E AND AFFECTION AND SENTIMENTS AND SUCH ELEMENTS ARE MISSING IN THE CASE OF THE AS SESSEE. THE OWNER OF THE HOUSE, ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 5 SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN RETRACTED FROM GIFT DEE D AND THE EVIDENCES SHOW THAT HE WAS NOT RELATED TO THE ASSESSEE OR HIS FAMILY ME MBERS AND THE OWNER HAS CONFIRMED THE RECEIPT OF RS.33,50,000/- FROM THE AS SESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED OF THE POW ER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF HIS BROTHER, WHICH ACCORDING TO HIM WAS R ETURNED LATER ON. THE AO ALSO ON EXAMINATION OF THE DOCUMENTS NOTED INTERESTING A ND ASTONISHING FACT THAT THE OWNER OF HOUSE, SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN ON 15.1 2.2011 ALSO EXECUTED A SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF SHRI IRSHAD KHAN, BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE FOR RS.10,00,000/- (RS.5 LACS GIVEN EARLIER AND RS.5 LACS GIVEN THROUG H CHEQUES ON 21.03.2006) IN RESPECT OF 142 SQ. YARDS CONSTRUCTED PORTION IN THE SAME PROPERTY AT 4/447, AMIR NISHAN, ALIGARH. THE AO, THEREFORE, FOUND THAT WHEN CONSTRUCTED PORTION OF 142 SQ. YARDS HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED THROUGH SALE DEED FO R A CONSIDERATION, BUT THE REMAINING PORTION OF 1210 SQ. YARDS WHICH IS ALMOST 10 TIMES OF CONSTRUCTED PORTION HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED WITHOUT CONSIDERATION THROUGH GIFT DEED ON 20.03.2006, WOULD PROVE THAT IT WAS NOT GENUINE TRA NSACTION AND WHEN THIS QUESTION WAS RAISED TO THE ASSESSEE, NO COGENT OR RELIABLE E XPLANATION HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. WIFE OF ASSESSEE ALSO COULD NOT GIVE SATI SFACTORY EXPLANATION REGARDING WHOLE OF THE TRANSACTION. THEREFORE, THE AO CONSIDE RING THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND DOCUMENTS ON RECORD AND STATEMENT S OF SEVERAL PERSONS FOUND THAT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WAS TRANSFERRED FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.33,50,000/- PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE SELLER SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN DURING THE ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 6 ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL AND THE DOCUMENTS WERE DELIBERATELY REGISTERED TO DEVIATE THE PROVISIONS OF LAW TO DEPRIVE THE DEPART MENT OF ITS DUE SHARE OF TAXES ON UNACCOUNTED FUNDS EMPLOYED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR PURC HASING THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. THEREFORE, IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT OF RS.33,50,000/- TOWARDS PURCHASE OF PROPERTY WHICH H AS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT. THEREFORE, ADDITION OF RS.33,50 ,000/- WAS MADE U/S. 69 OF THE IT ACT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE ADDITION WAS CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ) AND THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE INCORPORATED IN THE APPELLATE ORDER, IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE DENIED TO MAKE ANY PAYMENTS TO SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN AND HE HAS RE-AFFIRMED THAT THE GIFT DEED WAS MADE BY THE SELL ER IN FAVOUR OF HIS WIFE AND WIFE OF HIS BROTHER. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED THAT CIVIL SUIT IS PENDING FOR CANCELLATION OF THE GIFT DEED IN THE MATTER. THE LD . CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE ISSUE IN DETAIL AND FOUND THE CONTENTION OF SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN TO BE CORRECT THAT HE DID NOT KNOW THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS FOR MAKING ANY GIFT. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT IN TODAYS WORLD EVEN THE CLOSE RELATIVE INCLUDING FATHER AND MOTHER WOULD NOT GIVE SUCH A HUGE GIFT OF THE P ROPERTY. THEREFORE, GIFT IN QUESTION TO THE LADIES, WHO ARE UNKNOWN IS PRACTICA LLY INCORRECT. THE SELLER HAS ELABORATELY CONFIRMED THE RECEIPT OF MONEY THROUGH AGREEMENT TO SALE WHICH BEARS THE SIGNATURE OF SHRI IRSHAD KHAN, BROTHER OF ASSES SEE AND HIS SIGNATURES ARE ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 7 VERIFIABLE AND TALLIED WITH THE OFFICIAL SIGNATURE ON RECORD. THEREFORE, DENIAL BY THE ASSESSEE OF THE AGREEMENT IN QUESTION IS NOTHING BU T TO AVOID THE SALE AND SALE CONSIDERATION. THE MATTER IS PENDING IN THE CIVIL C OURT FOR CANCELLATION OF THE GIFT DEED AND FURTHER WHEN CONSTRUCTED PORTION OF 142 SQ . YARDS INSIDE THE SAID PROPERTY UNDER SALE HAS BEEN SOLD TO BROTHER OF ASSESSEE, I T IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT REMAINING AREA OF 1210 SQ. YARDS BEING 10 TIMES OF CONSTRUCTED POR TION WOULD BE GIFTED TO TWO UNKNOWN LADIES WITHOUT CONSIDERATION. IT WAS FURTHE R FOUND THAT THE VALUE OF PROPERTY AS PER CIRCLE RATE WAS RS.42,17,000/- WHIC H IS NEARBY SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.33,50,000/- WHICH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCO UNT OF THE SELLER. THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT ENTIRE STORY OF GIFT IS INCORRECT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID CONSIDERATION OF RS.33,50,000/- TO THE SELLER WHICH REMAINED UNEX PLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE PROPERTY AND ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE E HAS BEEN DISMISSED. 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF T HE ASSESSEE, SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR AND FACTS NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW IN MAKING AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION IN QUESTION. HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SHRI DURGA PRASAD MORE, 82 ITR 540 AND IN THE CASE OF SMT. SUM ATI DAYAL VS CIT 214 ITR 801, HELD THAT THE COURTS AND TRIBUNALS HAVE TO JUDGE THE EVIDENC ES BEFORE THEM BY APPLYING THE TEST OF HUMAN PROBABILITIES AFTER C ONSIDERING THE SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES. WHEN THIS TEST IS APPLIED TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE , IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 8 AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE JUSTIFIED IN MAKING AND CONFI RMING THE ADDITION OF RS.33,50,000/- AGAINST THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF U NDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN PROPERTY U/S. 69 OF THE IT ACT. IN THIS CASE, INFOR MATION WAS GIVEN BY SHRI ANWAR JALIL AHMAD KHAN TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT THAT HE HAS ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT TO SALE WITH ASSESSEE FOR RS.33.50 LACS ON DATED 25 .08.2004 FOR SALE OF PART OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AT 4/447, AMIR NISHAN, ALIGARH . IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT SAME SALE TRANSACTION WAS FRAUDULENTLY CONVERTED INTO GI FT DEED WHICH WAS REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF WIFE OF ASSESSEE AND WIFE OF HIS BROTHE R SRI IRSHAD KHAN TO AVOID PAYMENT OF TAX. HE HAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT THESE TW O LADIES ARE NOT KNOWN TO HIM AND, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF EXECUTING A NY GIFT DEED IN THEIR FAVOUR. HIS STATEMENT WAS RECORDED ON OATH, IN WHICH HE HAS CON FIRMED GIVING OF SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.33,50,000/- TO THE ASSESSEE THR OUGH AGREEMENT TO SALE. HE HAS ALSO EXECUTED POWER OF ATTORNEY ON 24.08.2004 IN RE SPECT OF THE SAME PROPERTY IN FAVOUR OF SHRI IRSHAD KHAN, BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS ALSO REGISTERED WITH SUB-REGISTRAR, ALIGARH. THE FACTS WOULD ALSO DISCLO SE THAT OUT OF THE SAME PROPERTY, 142 SQ. YARDS CONSTRUCTED PORTION WAS SOLD TO SHRI IRSHAD KHAN, BROTHER OF ASSESSEE FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.10 LACS. THE RECEIPT OF R S.10 LACS WAS ALSO REGISTERED WITH THE SUB-REGISTRAR, ALIGARH. THE COPY OF AGREEMENT T O SALE AND RECEIPT DATED 25.08.2004 WAS ALSO FILED AND ENTIRE SALE CONSIDERA TION HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE SELLER. THE SELLER ALSO CHALLEN GED THE EXECUTION OF GIFT DEED IN FAVOUR OF TWO LADIES AND ALL THE MATERIAL AND STATE MENT OF THE SELLER WERE SUPPLIED ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 9 TO THE ASSESSEE, BUT THE ASSESSEE EXCEPT DENYING TH E SAME EVEN DID NOT ASK FOR CROSS EXAMINATION OF THE SELLER. NO MATERIAL WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD AS TO WHAT WAS THE EVIDENCE OF LOVE AND AFFECTION AND OCCASION FOR MAK ING GIFT BY THE SELLER IN FAVOUR OF TWO LADIES. THEREFORE, THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHO RITIES BELOW ARE CORRECT THAT THERE WAS NO REASON FOR MAKING GIFT OF THE PROPERTY BY TH E SELLER IN FAVOUR OF TWO LADIES, WHO ARE UNKNOWN. FURTHER, THE GIFT WAS ALSO EXECUTE D IN THE NAME OF SMT. SHAHEEN KHAN, WIFE OF IRSHAD KHAN, BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF 1210 SQ. YARDS ALONG WITH WIFE OF ASSESSEE AND HER HUSBAND IRSHAD KHAN HAS PURCHASED 142 SQ. YARDS CONSTRUCTED PORTION IN THE SAME PROPERTY FOR A SUM OF RS.10,00,000/- FROM THE SELLER. IT IS UNNATURAL CONDUCT OF THE DONEE, S MT. SHAHEEN KHAN AND HER HUSBAND BECAUSE THE PART OF THE PROPERTY IS ADMITTE DLY SOLD FOR RS.10,00,000/- IN FAVOUR OF SHRI IRSHAD KHAN, THE HUSBAND OF DONEE, S MT. SHAHEEN KHAN AND THE SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY HAS BEEN GIVEN TO HIS WIFE DON EE WITHOUT CONSIDERATION. NO EXPLANATION HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE WHY THE SELLER HAS BECOME SO GENEROUS THAT WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION, HE HAS GIVEN SUBSTA NTIAL PROPERTY TO THE WIFE OF ASSESSEE AND WIFE OF BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. THE P URCHASE OF PROPERTY IN ABOUT 142 SQ. YARDS IN THE SAME PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTE D BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE EXCEPT DENYING THE TRANSACTION WITH THE SELLER HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO DISPROVE THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND STA TEMENT OF SELLER ON OATH. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE SUPPORTED BY DO CUMENTS, WOULD CLEARLY REVEAL THAT GIFT IN QUESTION IN FAVOUR OF THE TWO LADIES W AS SHAM AND WAS EXECUTED JUST TO ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 10 AVOID SALE DEED IN THE MATTER AND TO AVOID PAYMENT OF TAXES TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT. THE ASSESSEE USED HIS UNACCOUNTED MONEY FOR GETTING THE GIFT DEED EXECUTED OTHERWISE ON EXECUTION OF SALE DEED, THE A SSESSEE SHALL HAVE TO DISCLOSE THE SALE CONSIDERATION AND SHALL HAVE TO EXPLAIN IT S SOURCE TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT. THE SALE CONSIDERATION NOTED IN THE AGR EEMENT TO SALE IS APPROXIMATELY SAME AS PER CIRCLE RATE. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO VERIFI ED THE SIGNATURE OF SHRI IRSHAD KHAN ON THE MONEY RECEIPTS FROM HIS OTHER SIGNATURE S AND FOUND HIS SIGNATURES TO BE CORRECT. THEREFORE, THE TRANSACTION WOULD CLEARL Y PROVE THAT IT WAS A SALE TRANSACTION SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF RS.33,50,000/- IN CASH. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION IN THE LIGHT OF FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE A UTHORITIES BELOW. THE ASSESSEE IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS MERELY CONTENDED THAT SINCE GIFT DEED IS REGISTERED DOCUMENT, THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE DENIED. HOWEVER, WHEN THE TEST OF HUMAN PROBABILITIES IS APPLIED TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE A ND SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES, WOULD CLEARLY REVEAL THAT GIFT IN QUESTION WAS NOT GENUINE AND IT WAS A SALE TRANSACTION, WHICH WAS ULTIMATELY CULMINATED INTO G IFT DEED WITHOUT CONSIDERATION THROUGH WHICH UNACCOUNTED MONEY OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ROUTED. SINCE PART OF THE TRANSACTION IN FAVOUR OF BROTHER OF ASSESSEE HA S NOT BEEN DISPUTED, ON WHICH CONSIDERATION OF RS.10 LACS HAS PASSED ON, THEREFOR E, GIFT DEED IN QUESTION COULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR THE PURPOSE OF DELETING THE ADDI TION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE ITA NO. 552/AGRA/2012 11 DISCUSSION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY