Omanna Amma, Kollam V. ITO, Kollam

ITA 647/COCH/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 61424 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 06-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T J VINCENT
• Assessee Lawyers: ANITHA SUMANTH

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO 647/COCH/2010 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN (JM) AND SHRI B.R. BASKARA N(AM) I.T.A NO. 647/COCH/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08) SMT. OMANA AMMA VS ITO, WD.2, KOLLAM PROP M/S OMANA ELECTRONICS KACHERI JUNCTION, KOTTARAKKA, KOLLAM PAN : ACZPA7630D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. ANITHA SUMANTH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T.J. VINCENT DATE OF HEARING : 26-03-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19-04-2012 O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN (JM) THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I, TRIVANDRUM DATED 14-09-2010 AND PERTAI NS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISA LLOWANCE OF RS.12,60,600. 3. SMT. ANITHA SUMANTH, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.12,60,600 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. HOWEVER, BY MISTAKE THE ASS ESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED 2 ITA NO 647/COCH/2010 THE SAME IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. ACCORDING TO THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AGRICULTURAL INCOM E IS NOT TAXABLE UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT. HOWEVER, THE FACT REMAINS IS THAT T HE ASSESSEE OWNS THE AGRICULTURAL LAND AND RECEIVED AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED VOUCHER FOR RECEIPT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME BEFORE T HE ASSESSING AUTHORITY. THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME WAS UTILIZED FOR CONSTRUCTION O F PRV CENTRE. ACCORDING TO THE LD.REPRESENTATIVE, THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT E XAMINED THE VOUCHERS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST RECEIPT OF AGRICUL TURAL INCOME. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAN GO INTO THE INCOME OF THE EARLIER YEAR WHEN THIS ASSESSMENT IS CONFINED TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE UTILI ZED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME RELATABLE TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, THIS ASPECT CA N BE EXAMINED IN THAT ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI T.J. VINCENT, THE LD.DR SU BMITTED THAT THOUGH THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME IS NOT TAXABLE UNDER THE INCOME -TAX ACT, FOR RATE PURPOSE, THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME HAS TO BE DISCLOSED IN THE RETU RN OF INCOME FILED UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DI SCLOSED ANY AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. MERE FILING OF VOU CHER OF THE EARLIER YEAR CANNOT BE A BASIS FOR CLAIMING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE EARLIER YEAR. ACCORDING TO THE LD.DR, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAN EXAMINE THE SO URCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS SUBJECT MATTER OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS A ND THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT TRAVEL BEYOND THE ASSESSMENT YEAR WHICH IS U NDER CONSIDERATION. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY, THE ISSUE ARIS ES FOR CONSIDERATION FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS INVESTMENT IN CONSTRUCTION O F PVR CENTRE. THE ASSESSEE 3 ITA NO 647/COCH/2010 CLAIMS THAT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE EARLIER YEAR I.E. A.Y. 2006-07 WAS UTILIZED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION. THEREFORE, IT IS F OR THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE EARLIER YEAR WAS AVA ILABLE FOR UTILIZATION DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE FACT REMAINS IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 6-07 IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED. MERE PRODUCTION OF VOUCHERS FOR THE SO-CALLE D RECEIPT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME CANNOT BE A BASIS FOR CLAIMING THE AGRICULTU RAL INCOME OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY LD.DR, THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER CANNOT TRAVEL BEYOND THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAN EXAMINE THE SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE YEAR WHICH IS UNDER CONSIDE RATION. IN OTHER WORDS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT EXAMINE THE AGRICULTURAL I NCOME OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 WHICH IS NOT THE SUBJECT MATTER IN THE ASSES SMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. MOREOVER, MERE VOUCHER WIL L NOT ESTABLISH ANY RECEIPT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE ASSESSEE HAS TO ESTABL ISH THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION WAS CULTIVATED BY PRODUCING THE NECESSARY MATERIAL. IN THE CASE BEFORE US NO MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT THE ASSESSEE, HAS IN FACT, CULTIVATED THE LAND AND RECEIVED AGRICULTURAL INCOME. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL TO SUGGEST THAT THE LAND WAS CULTIVATED BY THE ASSESSE E, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE OPINION THAT MERE PRODUCTION OF VOUCHER WILL NOT PR OVE THE RECEIPT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY I NFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LOWER AUTHORITY. ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 6. THE NEXT GROUND OF APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO ADDI TION OF RS.8,50,000 SAID TO BE RECEIVED FROM SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI. 7. SMT. ANITHA SUMANTH, THE LD.REPRESENTATIVE FOR T HE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI IS THE HUSBAND OF THE A SSESSEE. THE ASSESSE 4 ITA NO 647/COCH/2010 RECEIVED RS.9,50,000 FROM HER HUSBAND. THE ASSESEE HAS FILED THE CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI. MERELY BECAUS E THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY MATERIAL FOR WITHDRAWAL OF RS.8,50,000 BY SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI FROM THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAD E THE ADDITION. ACCORDING TO THE LD.REPRESENTATIVE, SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI HAS SUFFICIENT INCOME FOR GIVING RS.8,50,000 TO THE ASSESSEE. IN FACT, ACCORDING TO THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, FROM THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AND 2007-08 SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI GAVE RS.8,50,000 TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI T.J VINCENT, THE LD.DR SUB MITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AFTER VERIFYING THE ACCOUNTS OF SHRI G THAN KAPPAN PILLAI FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO WITHDRAWAL OF RS.8,50,000. IN THE ABSENCE O F ANY WITHDRAWAL FROM THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI, THE CONF IRMATION LETTER SAID TO BE FILED FROM SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI HAS NO SIGNIFICANCE AT ALL. ACCORDING TO THE LD.DR, THE AMOUNT HAS TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM THE CAPITAL ACC OUNT OF SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY WITHDRAWAL, ACCORDIN G TO THE LD.DR, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NO FORCE. 9. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. NO DOUBT, THE AS SESSEE HAS FILED THE CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM HER HUSBAND SHRI G THANKAPP AN PILLAI . BUT, WHEN THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT HER HUSBAND SHRI G THANKAPPAN PI LLAI GAVE RS.8,50,000 NATURALLY AS A CONSEQUENCE THERE SHOULD BE ENTRY FO R THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE SAID AMOUNT IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT. ADMITTEDLY, NO SUCH WITHDRAWAL HAS BEEN MADE. WITHOUT WITHDRAWING THE MONEY FROM THE CAPITAL ACCO UNT, THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT HAVE GIVEN THE MONEY AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ENTRY WAS NOT MADE BY MISTAKE. WHEN THE ASSESSEE 5 ITA NO 647/COCH/2010 IS NOT ABLE TO ESTABLISH THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE MONE Y BY SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI FROM THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE O PINION THAT THE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM SHRI G THANKAPPAN PILLAI IS NOT JUSTIFIED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIN D ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY. THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 19 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER COCHIN, DT : 19 TH APRIL, 2012 PK/- COPY TO: 1. SMT. OMANA AMMA, PROP M/S OMANA ELECTRONICS, KACHERY JUNCTION, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLA 691 506 2. THE ITO, WD.2, OFFICE OF THE ADDL C.I.T., KARBALA J UNCTION, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOLLAM 3. C.I.T.(A)-I, TRIVANDRUM 4. C.I.T., TRIVANDRUM 5. THE DR (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH