SHIV RAM GHADWAL, Jaipur V. ITO, Ajmer

ITA 67/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1988 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 16-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 21-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM ROY DCIT DHK
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ] DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 67/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHIV RAM GHADWAL, PLOT NO. 17, JEEWAN MANDIR COLONY, LOHAGAL, AJMER. CUKE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), AJMER. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABSPG 5446 R VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM ROY (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 16/05/2017 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26/07/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FR OM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), AJMER DATED 10/12/2015 FOR THE A. Y. 2012-13, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) AJMER HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 1,56,500/- FOR PAYMENT MADE TO SMT. CHANDA DEVI (OUT OF RS. 4,10,000/-) BY TREATING THE SAME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCE. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) AJMER HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITIONS OF RS. 1,00,000/- RELATING TO ALLEGED PAY MENT ITA 67/JP/2016_ SHIV RAM GHADWAL VS ITO 2 TO SH. DINESH SONI BY THE APPELLANT BY TREATING THE SAME AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 3. THAT THE ADDITIONS TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1,00,000/ - ARE IN THE NATURE OF DOUBLE ADDITIONS AS THE ALLEGED INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES OF RS. 1,56,500/- (GROUND 1 ABOVE) SHALL BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE AMOUNT OF RS. 1,00,000/- (GROUND 2). 2. NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, ONLY WRI TTEN SUBMISSIONS HAS BEEN FILED. LD. DR WAS HEARD. AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR, THE APPEAL IS BEING DECIDED. 3. GROUND NO. 1 AND 3 OF THE APPEAL ARE INTERRELATE D AND ARE AGAINST CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS OF RS. 1,56,500/- FOR PAYMENT MADE TO SMT. CHANDA DEVI (OUT OF RS. 4,10,000/-) AND ARE IN THE NATURE OF DOUBLE ADDITIONS AS THE ALLEGED INCOME FROM OTHER S OURCES OF RS. 1,56,500/-. THE LD. CIT(A) HAD PARTLY CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 4.3 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, STATEMENT OF FACTS, GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND WRITTEN SUBMISSION CAREFULLY. THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DISCUSSED BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AT PAGE NO. 2 TO 6. IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED RESIDENT IAL HOUSE PROPERTY ON 15.10.2009 FROM SMT. CHANDA DEVI. AS PER THE SAL E DEED, THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 12 LAC AS UNDER: RS. 4,10,000/- CASH ON 15.10.2009 RS. 7,90,000/- BY CHEQUE ITA 67/JP/2016_ SHIV RAM GHADWAL VS ITO 3 THE AO RECORDED THE STATEMENT OF SMT. CHANDA DEVI ON 29.01.2013 WHEREIN, IN REPLY TO Q. NO. 4, SHE AFFIRMED THE FAC T THAT ON 15.10.2009 (THE DATE OF REGISTRATION OF ORIGINAL SALE DEED), S HE HAD RECEIVED A SUM OF RS. 4,10,000/- IN CASH FROM THE ASSESSEE. IN VIE W OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT DATED 15.10.2009 AND THE STATEMENT OF SMT . CHANDA DEVI RECORDED BY THE AO ON 29.01.2013, I AM OF THE CONSI DERED VIEW THAT THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT HE HAS NOT PAI D CASH OF RS. 4,10,000/- ON 15.10.2009 TO SMT. CHANDA DEVI, IS NO T ACCEPTABLE. HOWEVER, FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF, IT CAN B E SEEN THAT THE AO HIMSELF HAS ACCEPTED THAT ON 15.10.2009 AS PER THE CASH BOOK OF THE APPELLANT, THE AVAILABLE CASH BALANCE WAS 2,53,500/ -. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED COPY OF THE CASH BOOK DURING THE COU RSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDING, WHEREIN IT CAN BE SEEN THAT ON 15.10.20 09, THERE WAS A CASH BALANCE OF RS. 2,53,500/-. THEREFORE, THE CONT ENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE AO SHOULD HAVE MADE ADDITION OF RS. 1,56,500/- (RS. 4,10,000 - RS. 2,53,500) ONLY, IS FOUND TO BE ACCEPTABLE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,56,500/- IS CONF IRMED AND REMAINING ADDITION OF RS. 2,53,500/- IS DELETED. 4. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE RECORDS AND HEARING OF T HE LD. DR, I HAVE FOUND THAT THERE IS NO CONTRARY MATERIAL WHATEVER RE PORTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER, THEREFORE IN ABSENCE OF ANY MAT ERIAL AGAINST THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A),. THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ACCEP TED THE SOURCE UP TO CASH BALANCE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. FOR REM AINING AMOUNT OF RS. 1,56,500/-, THERE IS NO SOURCE WHICH COULD BE AC CEPTED IN ABSENCE OF ANY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, ITA 67/JP/2016_ SHIV RAM GHADWAL VS ITO 4 I HAVE NO ALTERNATE BUT TO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, I UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON T HIS ISSUE. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DI SMISSED. 5. GROUND NO. 2 OF THE APPEAL IS AGAINST CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,00,000/- RELATING TO PAYMENT TO SHR. DINESH S ONI. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 5.3 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, STA TEMENT OF FACTS, GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS CAREFULLY . IT IS SEEN THAT THE A.O. HAS RECORDED THE STATEMENT OF SHRI DINESH SONI ON 15/01/2013 AND 15/03/2013. IN BOTH THE STATEMENTS R ECORDED ON 15/01/2013 AND 15/03/2013, SHRI DINESH SONI HAS ACC EPTED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED CASH OF RS. 1 LAC FROM THE ASSESSEE. T HEREFORE, THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT HE HAS NOT RECEIVE D THE CASH OF RS. 1 LACS FROM SHRI DINESH SONI IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. ACCOR DINGLY, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. IS CONFIRMED. 6. FROM PERUSAL OF RECORD, I FOUND THAT SHRI DINESH SONI HAD CATEGORICALLY ADMITTED TWICE THAT HE HAD RECEIVED CA SH OF RS. 1.00 LAC FROM THE ASSESSEE. THERE IS NO CONTRARY MATERIAL WHA TEVER REPORTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN HIS ORDER FOUND ON RECORD. THEREFO RE IN ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL AGAINST THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), I H AVE NO ALTERNATE BUT TO CONCUR WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), THEREF ORE, I UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF ITA 67/JP/2016_ SHIV RAM GHADWAL VS ITO 5 ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26/07/2017. SD/- HKKXPAN (BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 26 TH JULY, 2017 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI SHIV RAM GHADWAL, AJMER. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD 1(3), AJMER. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 67/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR