Sh. Jaswant Singh, Distt. Hoshiarpur V. The Income-tax Officer, Hoshiarpur

ITA 691/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2426 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 16-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR TARUNDEEP KAUR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence; Ignorance of law
• Section: 80C; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR (SMC) BEFORE SH. A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. ASSESSMENT YEAR 688(ASR)/2014 2004-05 689(ASR)/2014 2005-06 690(ASR)/2014 2006-07 691(ASR)/2014 2007-08 692(ASR)/2014 2008-09 693(ASR)/2014 2009-10 SH. JASWANT SINGH VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, S/O DEV SINGH ALIA BADOWALIE WARD-2, VPO MORAWALLI, NEW ABADI, HOSHIARPUR. TEH. GARHSHANKER, DISTT. HOSHIARPUR. PAN:CQVPS5290P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. TARUN BANSAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: DR. TARUN DEEP KAUR, DR DATE OF HEARING: 16/11/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17/02/2016 ORDER THESE SIX APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGA INST DIFFERENT ORDERS OF CIT(A), JALANDHAR, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA RS 2004-05 TO 2009- 10. 2. THE ISSUES ARE COMMON IN ALL THESE YEARS AND SO, THE FACTS ARE BEING TAKEN FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 3. THE COMMON FACTS INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE AN INDIVIDUAL, WAS NOT FOUND TO BE FILING RETURN OF INCOME IN ANY OF THE YEARS. THE ASSESSEES ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME WAS AG RICULTURAL INCOME, 2 DUE TO WHICH, HE DID NOT FILE ANY RETURN OF INCOME. THE AO RECEIVED INFORMATION IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FROM THE IN VESTIGATION WING, AS PER WHICH, THE ASSESSEE HAD MAINTAINED 11 FDRS DU RING F.Y.2009-10 WITH DIFFERENT BANKS, TOTALING TO RS.73,88,770/-. THESE FDRS WERE CLAIMED TO BE MADE OUT OF DEPOSITS IN NON RESIDENT (EXTERNAL) ACCOUNT WHICH WAS STATED TO BE OPENED BETWEEN THE PERIOD FR OM 1984 TO 1998, WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS STATED TO BE AN NRI. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE EARNED INTEREST INCOME ON THESE FDRS DURIN G THE YEAR, UNDER CONSIDERATION WHICH WAS MUCH ABOVE THE NON TAXABLE LIMIT. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO ISSUED A NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE I.T. ACT TO THE ASSESSEE ON 25.02.2011 AND REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 148 O F THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION DECLARING THEREIN AN INCOME OF RS.3,63,149/- PLUS AGRICULTURE INCOME OF RS.20,000/- FOR RATE PURPOSES. THE WHOLE INCOME HAD BEEN CLAIMED A S EXEMPT U/S 10(4)(II) OF THE ACT FOR THE REASON THAT THE INTERE ST INCOME EARNED ON DEPOSITS IN NON RESIDENT (EXTERNAL) ACCOUNT IS EXEM PT FROM TAX. THE AO DENIED THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 1 0(4)(II) OF THE ACT AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.3,63,344/- TO THE RETUR NED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO HAD ALSO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1, 00,000/- TO THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF INADE QUATE HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWALS. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE AO AT AN ASSESSED INCOME OF RS.4,63,344/- PLUS AGRICULTURE INCOME OF RS.20,000/-. 3 4. BY VIRTUE OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO FOR ALL THE YEARS UNDER CO NSIDERATION. 5. BEFORE US, THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSE E IS THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE WRONGLY CALCULATED THE BANK INTEREST ON THE FDRS @ 7%, WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAD EARNED 4.00% FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, 3.80% FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 & 2 006-07, 3.80% FOR AY 2008-08 AND 3.79% FOR AY 2009-10. 6. THUS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED BEFORE TH IS BENCH, THE ACTION OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN DENYING THE ASSE SSEES EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S 10(4)(II) OF THE ACT. IT IS ONLY THE C ALCULATION/APPLICATION OF BANK INTEREST RATE ON THE FDRS, WHICH IS UNDER CHAL LENGE. 7. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS NOT GIVEN FULL BENEFIT U/S 80C FOR THE AYS 2007-08 TO 2009-10 , U/S 80L FOR AYS 2004-05 & 2005-06 AND U/S 88 FOR AY 2006-07, WHILE CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS. 8. THE LAST GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE L D. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION IN HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES UNDER THE HEAD OTHER SOURCES WHEN NO OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME WAS PROVED BY THE AO, IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM THE LAND OF HIS 4 AMERICAN UNCLE, SH. SITAL SINGH AND THAT THE ASSESS EES FATHER ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO THE ASSESSEES HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. 9. AN APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FILED, SEEKING TO PLACE ON RECORD AFFIDAVIT OF THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF, AFFIDAVIT OF SH. SITAL SINGH, REAL UNCLE OF THE ASSESSEE, AFFIDAVIT OF SH. DEV SINGH FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFFIDAVIT OF SH. HARISH KUMAR, ACCOUNT ANT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SOUGHT TO PRODUCE INTEREST RATE CERTIFICA TES ISSUED BY THE BANKS, IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION REGARDING DIFFERENT RA TES OF INTEREST EARNED BY HIM FROM VARIOUS BANKS IN THE YEARS UNDER CONSID ERATION. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SOUGHT TO PRODUCE TWO COMPARATIVE CHARTS WITH REGARD TO CALCULATION OF CORRECT FIGURES OF INTEREST AND T HE ASSESSES CLAIM UNDER SECTIONS 80C, 80L & 88 OF THE ACT. TWO SCHOOL CERT IFICATES PERTAINING TO HIS SONS SCHOOL HAVE ALSO BEEN SOUGHT TO BE FILED. FURTHER, COPY OF INTIMATION TO THE AO REGARDING LAND MEASURING 21 KANALS 6 MARLAS HAVING BEEN PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO SOUGH T TO BE FILED. THEN, A COPY OF POWER OF ATTORNEY GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BY HIS REAL UNCLE, SH. SITAL SINGH IN RESPECT OF LAND MEASURING 30 KANALS 9 MARLAS IN DISTRICT HOSHIARPUR, TO CULTIVATE AND USE THE SAID LAND, IS SOUGHT TO BE FILED. LASTLY, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS TO PRODUCE J-FORMS IN DICATING SALE PROCEEDS RECEIVED FROM AGRICULTURISTS. 10. THE APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE HAS BEE N VERIFIED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ATTESTED BY A NOTARY PUBLIC. 11. IN HIS AFFIDAVIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSED AS F OLLOWS: 5 I, JASWANT SINGH S/O SH. DEV SINGH, RESIDENT OF V&PO MORANWALI, TEH GARHSHANKAR, DISTT HOSHIARPUR, AGED 56 YEARS, DO HEREBY STATE ON SOLEMN INFORMATION AS UNDER :- 1. THAT I AM AN AGRICULTURIST AND WAS NRI FROM THE YEAR 1984 TO 1988 AND OPENED NRE ACCOUNT WITH VARIOUS BANKS DURING THAT PERIOD AND THE FDRS WERE ALSO MADE AND INCOME EARNED FROM THAT WAS EXEMPT U/S 10(4)(II) AT THAT T IME. 2. THAT I RECEIVED NOTICE FROM THE INCOME TAX DEPA RTMENT U/S 148 FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 TO 2009-10 (SIX YEARS). 3. THAT I CONSULTED MR. HARISH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT AT AMRITSAR TO WHOM I KNOW THROUGH SOME LOCAL FRIEND. HE CALCULA TED CERTAIN FIGURES OF INTEREST FROM VARIOUS FDRS @7% FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 TO 2009-10 AND HE FURTHER TOLD ME THAT IF THERE WILL BE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE INTEREST ACCOUNT THEN IT W ILL NOT MATTER FOR INCOME-TAX PURPOSE BEING ALL YOUR ALL INTEREST INCOME IS EXEMPT U/S 10(4)(II) AND FILING OF RETURNS ISJUST A FORMALITY AND THERE WILL NOT BE ANY TAX LIABILITY TO ME. 4. THAT I FILLED THE FIGURES OF INCOME AS CALCULATE D BY HIM ESTIMATEDLY @7% P.A. AND FILED THE RETURNS OF TH E ABOVE ALL THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS. 5. THAT WHEN I MET SH. TARUN BANSAL, ADVOCATE FOR HONBLE ITAT, SIX APPEALS, WHICH WERE FILED AFTER THE CONFI RMATION OF ADDITION BY THE LD CIT(A). HE ADVISED ME TO BRING B ANK CERTIFICATES OF INTEREST RATE APPLICABLE TO NRE ACC OUNTS BEING ACCORDING TO HIM NRE A/CS & FDRS DO NOT GET SUCH HIGH RATE OF INTEREST AND IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAT ALL T HE ASSESSMENT YEARS HAVE SAME RATE OF INTEREST ON FDR S. 6. THAT I BROUGHT THE INTEREST RATE CERTIFICATES FR OM STATE BANK OF INDIA DATED 14.10.14 & 10.11.14 , AS WELL AS, FROM CANARA BANK DATED 05.11.14 , WHERE I HAD MY ABOVE SAID ACCOUNTS AND IT WAS REALLY ASTONISHED TO SEE THAT THE RATE OF INTEREST FOR VARIOUS YEARS RANGING FROM 3.1%, 3.8%, 6.42%, 5% AND 7% IN THE F.Y. 2009-10 ONLY. COPY OF INTERES T RATE CERTIFICATES ARE ENCLOSED AT PAGE A-12 TO A-14. A S I AM NOT A EDUCATED PERSON, SO I NEVER CALCULATED AT WHAT RA TE I AM GETTING INTEREST. 7. THAT THE LD AO ASSUMED THE SAME FIGURES, WHICH I FILED IN THE COMPUTATION OF TAXABLE INCOME AND DID NOT APPL IED HIS MIND TO CALCULATE THE CORRECT FIGURES OF INTEREST AND HE 6 ASSESSED ALMOST THE SAME FIGURES, WHICH I TOOK IN M Y COMPUTATION OF INCOME, COMPARISON CHART IS ENCLOSED AT PAGE A-15 TO A-16. 8. THAT THE LD AO EVEN HAS NOT GIVEN ME ANY CLAIM U/S 80L AND / OR U/S 88 AS THE CASE MAY BE IN ALL THE SIX ASSE SSMENT YEARS, CHART AT PB A-17. 9. THAT IN ALL THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEAR ORDERS, AO WROTE THAT MY SON IS IN CLASS SIX AND DID NOT VERIFIED AND CALCU LATED THE EXACT TUITION FEE FOR CLAIM U/S 80-L OR U/S 88, AS THE CASE MAY BE. THE SCHOOL CERTIFICATES DATED 01.11.14 & 5.11.14 INDICATING THE TUITION FOR THE VARIOUS ASSESSMENT Y EARS IS ENCLOSED AT PAGE A-18 TO A-19. 10. THAT THE LD AO MADE THE ADDITION IN DRAWINGS IN THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS AS UNDER WITHOUT VERIFYING THE FACTS :- ASSTT. YEAR DRAWINGS (RS.) 2004-05 1.00 LAC 2005-06 1.00 LAC 2006-07 1.05 LAC 2007-08 1.05 LAC 2008-09 1.10 LAC 2009-10 1.10 LAC 11. THAT I HAVE AN AGRICULTURE LAND, WHICH WAS PURC HASED ME MEASURING 21 KANALS 6 MARLAS AND INTIMATION OF THE SAME WAS GIVEN TO THE LD AO DATED 05.08.11, COPY ENCL OSED AT PAGE A-20 AND LD AO HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE TRUE I NCOME OUT OF THE SAME. 12. THAT I ALSO HAD THE AGRICULTURE LAND ON RENT, MEASURING SEVEN ACRE FOR CULTIVATION IN THE YEAR 2004-05 FROM TADI TARSEM SINGH RAGI OF HOSHIARPUR AND IT WAS WITH ME UPTO MA RCH 2015. IT WAS TAKEN ON VERBAL AGREEMENT AND THE REN T WAS ALSO PAID IN CASH. 13. THAT MY FATHER MR. DEV SINGH S/O SH. CHANDA SIN GH IS ALSO HAVING AN ANCESTRAL LAND OF HALF AN ACRE AT DISTRIC T HOSHIARPUR, WHICH IS CULTIVATED BY ME AND MY FATHER JOINTLY. 7 MY FATHER IS ALSO AN EX-SERVICEMAN AND IS GETTING P ENSION OF RS.10,000/- PER MONTH APPROXIMATELY. 14. THAT MY REAL UNCLE SH. SITAL SINGH S/O SH. CHAN DA SINGH PERMANENT RESIDENT OF USA, ALSO GAVE ME THE POWER O F ATTORNEY TO CULTIVATE AND USE THE AGRICULTURE PRODU CE IN ANY MANNER OUT OF HIS LAND. THE LAND IS 30 KANALS 9 MAR LA AT DISTRICT HOSHIARPUR AND THIS FACT WAS CONFIRMED TO LD CIT(A), WHICH IS MENTIONED BY HIM AT PARA7.1 PAGE13 FOR THE A.Y. 2004 - 05, PAGE14 FOR THE A.Y.05-06, 06-07, 07-08, 08- 09 & 09-10. COPY OF POWER OF ATTORNEY GIVEN BY MY REAL UNCLE TO ME IS ENCLOSED AT PAGE A-21 TO A-22. 15. THAT I USED TO SELL SOME OF THE CROP IN THE MA NDI ALSO FROM THE LAND BELONGS TO ME, OF MY FATHER AND OF MY UN CLE COLLECTIVELY. SOMETIMES MY FATHER WENT TO THE MANDI , TO SELL THE SAME AND SOMETIMES I WENT TO SELL THE AGRICULT URE PRODUCE IN THE MANDI. WHOSOEVER WENT,THE COMMISSION AGENT RAISED THE J-FORMS ON THAT PARTICULAR PERSONS NAM E AND WE HAVE NEVER OBJECTED TO THIS BEING OUR AGRICULTURE I NCOME IS EXEMPT. COPY OF FEW J-FORMS ARE ENCLOSED AT PAGE A -23 TO A- 40 ALONG WITH YEAR-WISE CHART OF J-FORMS INDICATING THE SALE PROCEEDS RECEIVED FROM MANDI. THOUGH THEY ARE NOT ALL BUT IT HAS A CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENTIARY VALUE INDICATIN G THAT I HAD AN AGRICULTURE INCOME AND THAT AGRICULTURE PRODUCE IS MY SOURCE OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. WHATEVER AGRICULTURE INCOME I SHOWN IN MY INCOME-TAX RETURN WAS THE NET AGRICULTU RE INCOME LEFT OUT OF SPENDING MY HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. 16. THAT I HAVE BEEN WRONGLY ASSESSED BY LD AO FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 TO 2009-10 AND I MET MY HOUSEHOLD EXPE NSES AS UNDER, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY HIM:- A) A.Y.2004-05 :- OUT OF MY AGRICULTURE INCOME FROM 14 ACRES OF LAN D APPROXIMATELY AS MENTIONED ABOVE. B) A.Y.2005-06 :- OUT OF MY AGRICULTURE INCOME FROM 14 ACRES OF LAN D APPROXIMATELY AS MENTIONED ABOVE. C) A.Y.2006-07 8 OUT OF AGRICULTURE INCOME, AS WELL AS, NET WITHDRAW AL OF RS.13,000/- BY MY FATHER AND MY OWN WITHDRAWAL O F RS.90,000 TOTAL = RS.1,03,000/- D) A.Y.2007-08 :- OUT OF AGRICULTURE INCOME, AS WELL AS, WITHDRAWAL O F MY FATHER RS.20,000/- + SELF WITHDRAWAL OF RS.1,45 ,000 TOTAL = RS.1,65,000/. E) A.Y.2008-09 :- OUT OF AGRICULTURE INCOME, AS WELL AS, WITHDRAWAL O F MY FATHER RS.1,36,000/- + SELF WITHDRAWAL OF RS.7,800/- TO TAL = RS.1,40,800/. F) A.Y.2009-10 :- OUT OF AGRICULTURE INCOME, AS WELL AS, WITHDRAWAL OF MY FATHER RS.20,000/- + SELF WITHDRAWAL OF RS.1,90 ,000/- TOTAL = RS.2,10,000/-. 17. THAT WHEN THE APPEAL BEFORE LD CIT(A) WAS FILED BUT MY COUNSEL, I WAS ASSURED THAT MY CASE IS COVERED U/S 10(4)(II), MY TOTAL INTEREST INCOME IS EXEMPT, I WILL GET 100 % RELIEF. SO, THE CERTIFICATES OF THE BANKS, SCHOOL FEE AND AGRIC ULTURE INCOME J-FORMS AND OWNERSHIP OF LAND WAS NEITHER PR OCURED OR ARRANGED NOR FILED BEFORE ANY AUTHORITY BELOW A ND I WAS DEPRIVED OF FROM THE FACTUAL FIGURES AND ASSESSMENT . NOW I AM ENCLOSING ALL THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE U/R 29 OF ITAT WITH A PRAYER TO ADMIT THE SAME. I FURTHER PRAY THAT TAX SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED ON IGNORANCE OF LAW AND INCOME SHOULD BE COMPUTED WITH PROVISIONS OF LAW AND NOT A SINGLE RUPEE SHOULD BE CHARGED EXTRA THAN THE REAL INCOME, FOR THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE & E QUITY. DATE: 12.10.15 SD/- PLACE: HOSHIARPUR DEPONENT VERIFICATION I JASWANT SINGH ABOVE NAMED HEREBY DECLARE THAT THE ABOVE CONTENTS ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND B ELIEF AND NO PART OF IT IS FALSE. DATE: 12.10.15 SD/- PLACE: HOSHIARPUR DEPONENT 9 12. THE LD. DR HAS STRONGLY OPPOSED THE ASSESSEES ABOVE APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, CONTENDING THAT ALL THIS E VIDENCE OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO AND SINCE THIS WAS NOT DONE WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, IT CANNOT BE NOW ALLOWED TO BE RAISED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 13. THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD, IT IS SEEN, IS THAT THE ISSUE OF INTEREST RATE HAVING BEEN RAISED BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE EVIDENCE SHOWING THE INTEREST RATE EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION IS ESSENTIAL FOR A JU ST DECISION IN THE MATTER. 14. LIKEWISE, ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, A SIMILAR IS THE SITUATION WITH REGARD TO THE ASSESSEES CLAIM UNDER SECTIONS 80C, 80L AND 88 OF THE ACT AND SO, THE EVIDENCE WITH REGARD THERETO IS ALSO NE CESSARY TO BE BROUGHT ON RECORD. APROPOS THE ISSUE OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES , IT HAS BEEN CONTENDED THAT THE EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE AGR ICULTURAL INCOME EARNED BY THE ASESSEE COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, SINCE HE WAS ASSURED BY HIS COUNSEL THAT HIS CASE WAS COVERED U/S 10(4)(II) OF THE ACT AND THAT HE WOULD GET ONE HUNDRED PERCENT RELIEF. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS FOR THIS REASON, THE CE RTIFICATES OF THE BANKS, SCHOOL FEE AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME J FORMS AND OW NERSHIP OF LAND WERE NEITHER OBTAINED, NOR FILED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THIS, IT IS 10 RELEVANT TO MENTION HERE, IS THE CONTENT OF PARA-1 7 OF THE ASSESSEES AFFIDAVIT, AS REPRODUCED ABOVE. 15. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS IN THE LIGH T OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION IS T HAT ALL THIS EVIDENCE WAS NOT EITHER OBTAINED, OR FILED BEFORE THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW, SINCE HIS COUNSEL HAD ASSURED THAT HIS CASE WAS COVERED U/S 1 0(4)(II) OF THE ACT AND THAT HE WOULD GET FULL RELIEF. IN THIS REGARD, THE AFFIDAVIT OF SH. HARISH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT, READS AS UNDER: I, HARISH KUMAR S/O SH. ROSHAN LAL KUNDRA, RESID ENT OF HOUSE NO.3053, MOHALLA BAGICHI, KATRA KARAM SINGH, AMRITSAR, AGED 46 YEARS, DO HEREBY STATE ON SOLEMN INFORMATION AS UNDER: 1. THAT I AM AN ACCOUNTANT WORKING PART-TIME FOR THE L AST 20 YEARS. 2. THAT I MET MR. JASWANT SINGH THROUGH SOME COMMON FRIEND AND I WAS REQUESTED TO CALCULATE THE INTERES T INCOME OF NRE ACCOUNTS AND FDRS, WHICH I DID FOR TH E FIRST TIME. I ESTIMATEDLY TOOK 7% RATE OF INTEREST AND BLANKETLY CALCULATED THE SAME FOR THE SIX ASSESSMEN T YEARS AND HANDED OVER THE FIGURES TO MR. JASWANT SINGH WITH A VIEW THAT THESE FIGURES ULTIMATELY WIL L BE EXEMPT U/S 10(4)(II) AND THERE WILL BE NO LOSS OF REVENUE, AS WELL AS I CALCULATED HIS AGRICULTURE IN COME AFTER REDUCING ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AS PER MY KNOWLEDGE. DATED 12.10.15 SD/- PLACE:AMRITSAR DEPONENT I HARISH KUMAR ABOVE NAMED HEREBY DECLARE THAT THE ABOVE CONTENTS ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND B ELIEF AND NO PART OF IT IS FALSE. DATE: 12.10.15 SD/- PLACE: HOSHIARPUR DEPONENT 11 16. SH. SITAL SINGH, REAL UNCLE OF THE ASSESSEE, I N HIS AFFIDAVIT HAS STATED AS FOLLOWS: I, SITAL SINGH S/O SH. CHANDA SINGH, RESIDENT OF USA NOW AT V&PO MORANWALI, TEH GARHSHANKAR, DISTT HOSHIARPUR , AGED 68 YEARS, DO HEREBY STATE ON SOLEMN INFORMATION AS UN DER :- 1. THAT I AM A BACHELOR AND I TREAT MR. JASWANT SINGH S/O DEV SINGH MY REAL NEPHEW, AS MY SON AND I HAVE GIVEN TH E POWER OF ATTORNEY OF MY AGRICULTURE LAND MEASURING 30 KANALS 9 MARLAS AT DISTRICT HOSHIARPUR, TO HIM TO CULTIVATE AND ENJOY THE PRODUCE IN WHATSOEVER MANNER HE LIKES. DATE: 12.10.15 SD/- PLACE: HOSHIARPUR DEPONENT VERIFICATION I SITAL SINGH ABOVE NAMED HEREBY DECLARE THAT THE A BOVE CONTENTS ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF AND NO PART OF IT IS FALSE. DATE: 12.10.15 SD/- PLACE: HOSHIARPUR DEPONENT 17. SH. DEV SINGH, THE ASSESSEES FATHER HAS STATED IN HIS AFFIDAVIT AS UNDER: I, DEV SINGH S/O SH. CHANDA SINGH, RESIDENT OF V&PO MORANWALI, TEH GARHSHANKAR, DISTT HOSHIARPUR, AG ED 79 YEARS, DO HEREBY STATE ON SOLEMN INFORMATION AS UNDER :- 1. THAT I AM WIDOWER & EX-SERVICEMAN AND EARNING PENSI ON. 2. THAT I AM RESIDING WITH MY SON, DAUGHTER-IN-LAW & O NLY GRANDSON AND HELPING MY SON JASWANT SINGH IN HIS CULTIVATION AND CONTRIBUTING FOR HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES OUT OF THE CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM MY SAVING BANK FROM TIME TO T IME PLUS OUT OF MY AGRICULTURE PRODUCE FROM HALF AN ACRE ANC ESTRAL AGRICULTURE LAND AT DISTRICT HOSHIARPUR. DATE: 12.10.15 SD/- 12 PLACE: HOSHIARPUR DEPONENT VERIFICATION I DEV SINGH ABOVE NAMED HEREBY DECLARE THAT THE ABO VE CONTENTS ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF AND NO PART OF IT IS FALSE. DATE: 12.10.15 SD/- PLACE: HOSHIARPUR DEPONENT 18. A PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE SHOWS THAT THE ADDITIONA L EVIDENCE SOUGHT TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDI CATING THE ADDITIONS MADE. THE ISSUE REGARDING RATE OF INTEREST AND THE ASSESSEES CLAIM UNDER SECTIONS 80C, 80L AND 88 OF THE ACT, TO REITERATE, HAS BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THIS BENCH. THES E ISSUES UNDOUBTEDLY EMANATE FROM THE ORDER UNDER APPEAL. THE EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES IS ALSO ESSENTIAL, HAVING NOT B EEN PRODUCED BEFORE THE TAXING AUTHORITIES FOR THE VIEW OF THE ASSESSEE S COUNSEL THAT THE CASE WAS COVERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10(4)(I I) OF THE ACT. 19. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT IT IS THE CORRECT INCOM E OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX. THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAINS TO THE ADDITIONS MADE AND CONFIRMED BY THE TAXING AUTHORITIES, RESPECTIVELY. THEREFORE, THIS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE I S REQUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED FOR DECIDING THE MATTER. THUS, IN THE I NTEREST OF JUSTICE, THIS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IS ADMITTED. SINCE THIS EVIDENC E WAS NOT BEFORE THE AO AT THE FIRST STAGE, THE MATTER CONCERNING ALL TH ESE APPEALS IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE AO, TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCO RDANCE WITH LAW, BY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THIS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, ON AFFORDING DUE AND 13 ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUPPORT HIS CASE. THE ASSESSEE, NO DOUBT, SHALL CO-OPERATE IN THE FRESH PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AO. ALL PLEAS AVAILABLE UNDER THE LAW SHALL REMAIN AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE IN THESE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AO. ORDER ED ACCORDINGLY. 17. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, ALL T HE SIX APPEALS ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17/02/2016 . SD/- (A.D. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 17 /02/2016 /SKR/ COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE: SH. JASWANT SINGH, GARSHANKAR, DIS TT. HOSHIARPUR. 2. THE ITO, WARD-2, HOSHIARPUR. 3. THE CIT(A), JLR 4. THE CIT, JLR. 5. THE SR. DR, ITAT, ASR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.