The Income tax Officer, Phagwara V. Sh. Narinder Kumra Prop., Phagwara

ITA 623/ASR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 73237 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 23-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained investment; Gift; Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.623(ASR)/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 PAN :ABIPK6846M INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SH. NARINDER KUMRA PROP. WARD-1, PHAGWARA. M/S. KUMRA TRADERS, HADIABAD, PHAGWARA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY:SH. MAHAVIR SINGH, RESPONDENT BY:SH. SANDEEP VIJH, CA DATE OF HEARING: 05/02/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:25/02/2014 ORDER PER BENCH ; THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST T HE IMPUGNED ORDER OF CIT(A), JALANDHAR, DATED 19.01.2011 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD.CITA) HAS ERRED IN: 1. ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHEN SUFFICIENT O PPORTUNITY WAS GRANTED DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 2 2. NOT PASSING AN ORDER IN WRITING AND THEREFORE, N O COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SUB RULE (2) OF RULE 46A WHI LE ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IGNORING THE DECI SION OF THE HONBLE ITAT, CHANDIGARH BENCH, CHANDIGARH IN THE C ASE OF SMT. SURINDER KAUR DATED 29.07.2011 PASSED IN ITA NO.596/CHD/2011. 3. DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,03,000/- MADE ON A CCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE AO HAS RIGHTLY MADE THIS ADDITION AS THE ASSESS EE FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS DESPITE OF FA CT THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITIES WERE AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 4. DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.9,00,100/- (RS.20 1500 + 197500 + 501100) MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN TH E BANK ACCOUNT IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE IDENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE P ERSONS FROM WHOM FOREIGN REMITTANCES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED DESPITE THE FACT THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITIES WERE AFFORDED TO THE ASSE SSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 5. DELETING ADDITION OF RS.1215000/- MADE ON ACCOUN T OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PROPERTY WITHOUT APPRECI ATING THE FACTS SUBMITTED BY THE AO IN REMAND REPORT. 6. IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE AO BE RESTORED. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND DERIVING INCOME FROM A PROPRIETOARY CONCERN BEING R UN UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF KUMRA TRADERS, HADIABAD WHICH DEALS IN TRA DING OF MACHINERY PARTS. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSES SEE ON 21.08.2008 DECLARING TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.3,41,818/-. THE ASSE SSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 3 ACT, WAS COMPLETED BY THE AO AT AN INCOME OF RS. 26,69,368/- VIDE ORDER DATED 28.12.2010. WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT, THE AO HAS MADE THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: I) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN TH E CAPITAL ACCOUNT: RS.2,03,000/- II) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN T HE RS.2,01,500/- BANK ACCOUNT III) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN THE RS.1,97,500/- BANK ACCOUNT IV) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN T HE RS.5,01,000/- BANK ACCOUNT V) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT IN PROPERTY RS .20,03,000/- FROM UNEXPLAINED SOURCES. VI) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNVOUCHED EXPENSES RS. 9,450/- 3. ON APPEAL, THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY DEL ETED THE ADDITIONS OF RS. 2,03,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF AMOUNT CREDITED IN THE CAP ITAL ACCOUNT, RS.9,00,100/- (RS.2,01,500/- + RS.1,97,500/- + RS.5 ,01,000/-) TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, RS.12,15,00 0/- IN RESPECT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASE OF LAND AND RS.9,450/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNVOUCHED EXPENSES. NOW, THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED B Y THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS BENCH. 4. THE LD, DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER H AND RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REITERATED THE SUBMISSI ONS MADE BEFORE HIM. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 4 THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPEL LATE AUTHORITY, WHO AFTER TAKING THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO AND GIVING ADE QUATE OPPORTUNITY TO HIM, ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN DISPUTE ON THAT BASIS. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD, ESPECIALLY THE ORDERS OF THE AUTH ORITIES BELOW. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS.2,03,000/- , WHICH REPRESENTS U NEXPLAINED CREDITS IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE OF THE CONS IDERED VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED A DETAILED AND WELL REASONED ORDE R WHICH REQUIRES NO INTEREFERENCE, WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION IN DISPU TE. THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 6.3 & 6.4 OF HIS ORDER ARE REPRODUCED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AS UNDER: 6.3. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE AO AS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUE UNDER REFERENCE. I HAVE AL SO EXAMINED THE ASSESSMENTS RECORDS AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ADMITTED BY MY PREDECESSOR AT THE APPE LLATE STAGE. I HAVE FURTHER CONSIDERED REMAND REPORT(S) OF THE A.O. AND COUNTER COMMENTS THEREON FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE ISSUE UNDER REFERENCE. AFTER CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, TH E SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, THE CLARIFICATIONS SOUGHT FOR AND THE OTHER MATERIAL BROUGHT ON RECORD, THE FOLLOWING POSITION EMERGES IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION. (A) THE CREDIT OF RS.2,03,000/- IS OUT OF THE GIFT RECE IVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS REAL BROTHER SH. BALDEV KRISHAN KUMRA WHO IS SETTLED IN USA SINCE 1992 AND HIS CONFIRMATION D ULY NOTARIZED HAS BEEN FILED WHICH COULD NOT BE FILED DURING ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 5 ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE AND THE DONOR SH. BALDEV KRISHANB KUMRA ARE REAL BROTHERS STANDS ESTABLISHED WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. (B) THE DONOR I.E. SH. BALDEV KRISHAN KUMRA HAS CLARIFI ED THAT THE DRAFTS WERE GOT MADE OUT OF THE CASH IN HAND AVAILA BLE WITH HIM OUT OF HIS ACCUMULATED INCOME. (C) THE DONOR I.E. SH. BALDEV KRISHAN KUMAR IS SETTLED IN USA SINCE 1992 AND IS STATED TO BE IN ICE CREAM BUSINES S. THE BROTHERS SHARE A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WHICH IS BORNE OUT BY THE FACT THAT SH.BALDEV KRISHNA KUMRA HAD FILED APPLICA TION WITH THE US AUTHORITIES FOR THE IMMIGRATION OF HIS REAL BROTHER SH. NARINDER KUMAR KUMRA AND HIS FAMILY TO USA. THE FAC T THAT THE DONOR IS IN REGULAR BUSINESS AND EARNING INCOME IS ALSO ESTABLISHED FROM THE APPLICATION FILED FOR IMMIGRAT ION OF THE APPELLANT. (D) IT IS ALSO A PRACTICE THAT THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF A PERSON WHO ARE SETTLED ABROAD USED TO HELP THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS IN INDIA. (E) NO CASE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE A.O. THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED BACK THE AMOUNT BY WAY OF DRAFT/CHEQUE AFTER PAYING MONEY TO HIS REAL BROTHER. (F) AS THE MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM ABROAD AND ALS O FROM THE REAL BROTHER, GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION CANNOT BE DOUBTED. (G) THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSON BEING REAL BROTHER, CRED ITWORTHINESS OF THE DONOR AND GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION STANDS ESTABLISHED IN THIS CASE. 6.4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE STATED FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE, THE GIFT OF RS.2,03,000/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS REAL BROTHER SETTLED ABROAD IS TREATED AS GENUI NE AND THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 6.1. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFER E WITH THE WELL REASONED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SAME IS UPHELD. ACC ORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 6 7. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS.9,00,100 (RS.201,0 0/- + 197,500/- + RS.501,100/-) ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CRE DIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN CONCRETE AND LOGICAL FINDINGS WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE. THE FINDINGS GIVE N BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 7.2 TO 7.4 OF HIS ORDER ARE REPRODUCED FOR THE SAK E OF CONVENIENCE AS UNDER: 7.2. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE AO AS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITIONS UNDER CHALLENGE. THE THIRD GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST THREE ADDITIONS OF RS.2,01,500/- RS.1,97,50 0/- AND RS.5,01,100/-, ALL TOTALING TO RS.9,00,100/- TOWARD S ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. OUT OF THE THREE ADDITIONS AGITATED IN THE THIRD GROUND OF APPEAL, THE TWO AMO UNTS ( I.E. RS.2,01,500/- AND RS.1,97,500/- REPRESENT THE GIFTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS REAL BROTHER SH. BALDEV KRISHAN K UMRA SETTLED ABROAD. THIS ISSUE REGARDING RECEIPT OF GIFTS FROM REAL BROTHER HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN T HE SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL AND FOLLOWING THE SAME, THE TWO CREDITS OF R S.2,01,500/- AND RS.1,97,000/- WHICH ALSO REPRESENT THE GIFTS RECEI VED FROM THE REAL BROTHER SETTLED ABROAD ARE ALSO TREATED AS GENUINE AND THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS, THEREFORE, DELETED. 7.3. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AS REGARDS THE ADDI TION OF RS.5,01,100/- IS CONCERNED ARE AS UNDER: THE SUM OF RS.501,100 REPRESENTS ADDITION MADE BY THE AO TOWARDS THE CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT NO.1 417 WITH CANARA BANK ON 27.3.2008. WHILE FRAMING ASSESSMENT IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION DOES NOT BELONG TO HIM AND THIS FINDS MENTION IN THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE INCORPOR ATED AT PAGE NO.5 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE AO HAS HOWEVER, TREATED T HE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AS INCOME FROM UNEXPL AINED SOURCE AND PUT TO TAX. REGARDING THE CREDIT OF RS.501,100/-, IT IS SUBMITT ED THAT IT REPRESENTS PART OF THE SALE PROCEEDS OF LAND AT BASANT NAGAR W HICH IS A VILLAGE ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 7 WITH POPULATION LESS THAN 2,000 AND NEAR KHERA VILL AGE. COPY OF THE SALE DEED OF THE PROPERTY AS FILED WITH THE AO IS B EING ENCLOSED AT PAGE NO. 50 TO 62. AS CONTENDED AT THE ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND HAS M ERELY SOLD IT AS A POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER. THE DOCUMENT GIVING SPECI AL POWER OF ATTORNEY TO SH. NATRINDER KUMRA ONLY FOR THE PURPOS E OF SALE WHICH WAS FILED WITH THE AO IS BEING ENCLASSED AT PAGE NO .63 TO 64. THERE WAS THUS THUS NO REASON TO PRESUME THAT THE CREDIT OF RS.501,100 IN THE CURRENT ACCOUNT WITH CANARA BANK IS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. IN FACT, THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY WAS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE CASE OF SH. SAT PAL KUMRA WHOISE CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 WAS ALSO SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS FILED IN HIS CASE W HICH HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED U/S 143(3) ARE ENCLOSED AT PAGE NO.65 TO 72. THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY HAVING BEEN ACCEPTED U/S 143(3) IN THE CASE OF ONE OF THE REAL OWNER AND THERE WAS NO REASON TO PRESUME T HAT THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE SAME ARE UNACCOUNTED FOR INCOME OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER WHO HAS ONLY HELPED IN THE SALE TRA NSACTION. THE NAMES OF THE OTHER CO-OWNERS I.E. THE DAUGHTER OF SH. SAT PAL KUMRA HAVE ALSO BEEN MENTIONED IN THE IKRAR NAMA ENCLOS ED ABOVE. COPY OF IKRAR NAMA WAS NEVER CALLED FOR AND HAS THE ASSE SSING OFFICER CALLED FOR THE SAME IT WOULD HAVE BEEN FILED AS WAS DONE I N THE CASE OF SH. SAT PAL KUMRA. THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS SHOULD BE ADMITT ED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A AS AO IS VARYING WITH THE STAND ACCEPTED IN THE CASE OF ONE CO-OWNER AND ALSO RELEV ANT DOCUMENT WAS NOT CALLED FOR. THE ADDITION OF RS.501,100/- IS THU S TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED AS YOUR HANDS. 7.4. AFTER CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE OBSERVATIONS O F THE AO AS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE CLEAR PICTURE EMERGES IS THAT THE CREDIT OF RS.501, 100 IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ON 27.03.2008 IS OUT OF THE SALE PROCEEDS O F RS.5,60,000/- OF LAND AT VILLAGE BASANT NAGAR, PHAGWARA WHICH WAS PU RCHASED BY THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE IN HIS OWN NAME AND THAT OF HIS 3 DAUGHTERS. THE SALE DOCUMENT WAS EXECUTED BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY ON 07.03.2008 AS A SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF HIS FATHER AS PER THE SALE DOCUMENT AND THE POWER OF ATTORNEY FILED. IT IS WOR TH MENTIONING THAT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OF SH. SAT PAL KUMRA WHO IS THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE PURCHASER OF THE LAND WERE ALS O TAKEN UP IN SCRUTINY AND THESE WERE COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT AFTER CONSIDERING THE ISSUE OF PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY R EFERRED TO ABOVE. ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 8 THESE DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE FILED AT PAGE NO.65 TO 7 2 OF THE PAPER BOOK WERE ADMITTED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES IN THE O RDER UNDER RULE 46A OF THE ACT PASSED BY MY PREDECESSOR ON 24.02.20 12. IN FACT ON A SPECIFIC QUERY MADE BY MY PREDECESSOR, IT WAS EXPLA INED THROUGH THE REPLY DATED 18.05.2012 THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF SH. SAT PAL KUMRA FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09, THE ISSUE OF SALE OF THE SAID PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE SOURCES OF PURCHASE WE RE DEALT WITH. COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY SH. SAT PAL KUMRA IN HIS CASE CLEARLY UPHOLDS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE L AND IN QUESTION STANDS FULLY EXPLAINED IN THE CASE OF SH. SAT PAL K UMRA, THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE WHO IS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ALO NG WITH HIS 3 DAUGHTERS, THERE IS NO REASON TO TREAT THE SUM OF R S.5,01,.100/- WHICH REPRESENTS THE PART OF THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE SAM E PROPERTY AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ADDITION OF RS.5,01,100/- WRONGLY MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO H EREBY DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 7.1. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ADDITION DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED A WELL REASONED ORDER WHICH REQUIRES NO INTE RFERENCE AND THE SAME IS UPHELD. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 8. AS REGARDS THE ADDITION OF RS.12,15,000/- IN RE SPECT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASE OF LAND, WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A), WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION, WHICH ARE REASONED ONE AND REQUIRES NO INTERFERENCE . THE RELEVANT PART OF THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 8.2 & 8.2 A RE REPRODUCED FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AS UNDER: ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 9 8.2. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WEL L AS SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE ISSUE UNDER REFERENCE. THE F OURTH GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS.12,15,000/- TO WARDS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY AT PHAGW ARA. THIS IS THE SAME PROPERTY WHOSE PART SALE PROCEEDS WERE ADDED T O THE INCOME AND THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN AGITATED IN THE THIRD GR OUND OF APPEAL. THE AO WHILE FRAMING ASSESSMENT TOOK THE SALE PRICE OF THE LAND AS THE BASIS AND PRESUMED THAT THE PURCHASE PRICE WOULD AL SO HAVE BEEN THE SAME RATE OF RS.40,000/-, PER MARLA AND THIS HAS BE EN MENTIONED AT POINT NO.4 AT PAGE NO. 6 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. T HE TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE OF THE LAND WAS THUS WORKED OUT BY THE AO AT RS.42,80,000/-. FURTHER, THE AO AFTER GOING THROUGH THE BANK ACCOUN TS CO-RELATED PAYMENTS OF RS.18,50,000/- IN RESPECT OF THIS PROPE RTY. THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.24,30,000/- WAS TREATED AS THE INVESTM ENT AND THE SHARE OF THE ASSESSEE I.E. WAS PUT TO TAX IN HIS HANDS AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM UNEXPLAINED SOURCES. 8.3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSES SEE AS WELL AS THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE AO AS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT OR DER, IT HAS ALREADY BEEN HELD IN THE THIRD GROUND OF APPEAL THA T THE PROPERTY DOES NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE. THE PROPERTY IS OWNED B Y THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE I.E. SH. SAT PAL KUMRA AND HIS 3 DAUGHTERS . THE FACT REGARDING PURCHASE OF PROPERTY BY THE FATHER IN HIS INDIVIDUAL NAME AND IN THE NAME OF 3 DAUGHTERS HAS ALSO BEEN ESTABL ISHED FROM THE STATEMENTS OF THE DAUGHTERS WHICH WERE RECORDED BY THE A.O. THE PURCHASE OF THIS PROPERTY STANDS EXPLAINED IN THE CASE OF SH. SAT PAL KUMRA WHOSE ASSESSMENT FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 WAS COM PLETED U/S 143(30 OF THE ACT AFTER CONSIDERING THIS ISSUE. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, NO ADDITION O N THIS SCORE COULD BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE DETAILED REASONING GIVEN WHILE DEALING WITH THE THIRD GROUND OF APPEAL IS FU LLY APPLICABLE FOR THIS GROUND OF APPEAL ALSO AND ACCORDINGLY THE ADDI TION OF RS.12,15,000/- IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED IN THE CAS E OF THE ASSESSEE. 8.1. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED ITA NO.623(ASR)/2013 10 WELL REASONED ORDER WHICH REQUIRES NO INTERFERENCE AND THE SAME IS UPHELD. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25TH FEBRUARY, 2014. SD/- SD/- (B.P. JAIN) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 25TH FEBRUARY, 2014 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE:SH.NARINDER KUMRA, HADIABAD, PHAGWARA 2. THE ITO, WARD-1, PHAGWARA. 3. THE CIT(A), JLR 4. THE CIT, JLR 5. THE SR DR, ITAT, AMRITSAR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR