SMT. LEELA BAI W/O MANGILAL JAIN, Ujjain V. THE ITO-1(2), Ujjain

ITA 733/IND/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5703 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S S DESHPANDE
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 69; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE (SINGLE MEMBER CASE) BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO. 733/IND/2015 A.Y. : 2008-09 SMT.LEELA BAI ITO, UJJAIN VS. 1(2), UJJAIN APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN NO. AIOPL3623L A PPELLANT S BY : SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.A.VERMA, DR O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), UJJAIN, DATED 20.11.2014 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. GROUND NO. 1 IS NOT PRESSED. GROUND NO.1 IS DISMISS ED AS NOT PRESSED. 3. GROUNDS NO. 2, 3 & 4 ARE COMMON GROUNDS. DATE OF HEARING : 24 .02. 20 16 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 .02. 201 6 SMT. LEELA BAI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, 1(2), UJJAIN I.T.A.NO. 733/IND/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 2 2 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE I S AN INDIVIDUAL DERIVING INCOME FROM AGRICULTURE. THE AO IS IN RECEIPT OF AIR INFORMATION FROM CIT (CIB), BHOPAL, THAT SHRI JIVAN SINGH DEPOSITED CASH OF RS. 20,95,000/- IN HI S BANK ACCOUNT. ON BEING ENQUIRED SHRI JIVAN SINGH STATED THAT HE HAD RECEIVED THE SAID CASH ON SALE OF AGRICULTURE L AND TO SMT. LEELA BAI. ACCORDINGLY, NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUED O N 01-02- 2012. IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148 THE ASSESSEE FI LED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING AGRICULTURE INCOME OF RS . 2,12,190/-. THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 12,07,952/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69 OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961. 5. THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD T HE LAND TO LEELA BAI AND IN THE SAID SALE DEED, SHE HA S PURCHASED THE LAND. THE AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHA SED THE LAND FROM SHRI JIVAN SINGH AND SHRI JIVAN SINGH WAS EXAMINED AND SHRI JIVAN SINGH HAS INFORMED TO THE DEPARTMENT THAT HE HAS SOLD THE LAND TO THE ASSESSE E IN CONSIDERATION OF RS. 20.95 LAKHS AND DEPOSITED THE CASH IN HIS SAVING BANK ACCOUNT. AS PER THE AO, THE COST OF THE SAID LAND SMT. LEELA BAI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, 1(2), UJJAIN I.T.A.NO. 733/IND/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 3 3 WAS SHOWN AT CONSIDERATION OF RS. 16,18,500/- AND R S. 22,30,000/- FROM SHRI POP SINGH AND JIVAN SINGH. TH E ASSESSEE HAS PAID AMOUNT OF RS. 24,90,000/-. THE AS SESSEE COULD EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF RS. 12,87,408/- AND ASS ESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF RS. 7952/-. THERE FORE, THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 12,07,952/- AS UNEXPLA INED U/S 69 OF THE ACT. 6. THE MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. C IT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON THESE GROUNDS. 7. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUBMITTED THA T THE ASSESSEE IS AGRICULTURIST. SHE HAS NO OTHER SOU RCE OF INCOME. AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION SHRI JIVAN SING H HAS DEPOSITED RS. 20,95,000/- CASH IN HIS ACCOUNT. SHRI JIVAN SINGH STATED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED THE PAYMENT OF RS . 25 LAKHS IN CASH AND HE HAS SOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND OF RS. 55 LAKHS TO THE ASSESSEE. THE REGISTRY OF THE LAND WAS AT RS. 1 6,41,500/-/ 8. THE AO HAS CALLED SHRI JIVAN SINGH AND HE WAS ALSO EXAMINED AND THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN T HE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT OF RS. 12,07,952/-. THE ASSESSEE IS THE AGRICULTURIST AND SHE HAS NO ANY OTHER INCOME. DURING THE COURSE OF SMT. LEELA BAI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, 1(2), UJJAIN I.T.A.NO. 733/IND/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 4 4 ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN THE COPY OF SALE DEED TO MANDI ON PAGE 42-58 AND THE AO HAS TRI ED TO VERIFY THE AMOUNT OF SALE BILL RECEIVED BY THE ASSE SSEE FROM THE ABOVE ALL THESE BILLS. THE AO WHILE FRAMING THE ASS ESSMENT WAS OF THE VIEW THAT IN SOME OF THE BILLS THE AO CO ULD NOT VERIFY THE AMOUNT AS TO HOW MUCH AMOUNT ASSESSEE HAS RECEI VED FROM KRISHI UPAJ MANDI, UJJAIN. THEREFORE, HE HAS M ADE THE ADDITION. THE DETAILED CHART IS GIVEN ON PAPER BOOK PAGE 42, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF T HE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS DATES. THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT IN SOME OF THE BILLS, THE AO COULD NOT VERIFY FROM HOW MUCH MONEY GET FROM THESE RECEIPTS LIKE RECEIPT ON PAGE NOS. 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 54, 55. THEREFORE, THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION. THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THE AGRICULTURAL CR OP TO KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, UJJAIN ONLY. THEREFORE, WHATEVER THE AMOUNT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THAT IS RECEIVED B Y RECEIPT ONLY. THEREFORE, THE AMOUNT MAY CONFIRMED FROM KUMS , UJJAIN AND IF THE AO IS SATISFIED THAT HE ASSESSEE HAS REC EIVED THE AMOUNT FROM KUMS, THEN NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR. SMT. LEELA BAI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, 1(2), UJJAIN I.T.A.NO. 733/IND/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 5 5 9. THE LD. DR HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE MATTER IS RESTOR ED TO THE FILE OF AO FOR VERIFICATION. 10. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, I AM OF THE VIEW THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE AMOUNT FROM KUMS, UJJ AIN. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO PRODUCE THE LIST AS TO HOW MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM KUMS AND HE SHOULD GET CERTIFICATE FROM THE KUMS AND THEREAFTER THE AO IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVE D THIS MUCH AMOUNT FORM KUMS OR NOT AND AFTER SATISFYING THE SO URCE OF RECEIPTS, THE AO IS AT LIBERTY TO PASS THE ORDER AS PER LAW AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OP EN COURT ON 29 TH FEBRUARY, 2016, SD/- ( D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 29 TH FEBRUARY, 2016. SMT. LEELA BAI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, 1(2), UJJAIN I.T.A.NO. 733/IND/2015 A.Y. 2008-09 6 6 CPU*24.29