SHRIMATI RAJINDER KAUR, KAPURTHALA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER-II, KAPURTHALA

ITA 76/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8959 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 14-05-2019
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. N. S . SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A ND SH. N. K. CHOUDH RY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 76 /ASR./201 8 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2009 - 10 SMT. RAJINDER KAUR, VPO - KALA SANGHIAN, DIST T. KAPURTHALA VS INCOME TAX OFFICER - II, KAPURTHALA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. BRTPK2251C ASSESSEE BY : SH. ASHRAY SARNA , CA REVENUE BY : SH . CHARAN DAS S , DR DATE OF HEARING : 14.05 .201 9 DAT E OF PRONOUNCE MENT : 21 .06 .201 9 ORDER PER N. S . SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) - 2 , JALANDHAR DATED 25.09 .2017 . 2. GROUND NOS. 1 & 2 OF THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER: 1. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON BLE CIT(A) DATED 25.09.2017 IS AGAINST THE LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, HON BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 OF THE ACT AND THAT TOO WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH THE MANDATORY CONDITIONS U/S 147/148/151 AS ENVISAGED UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. ITA NO. 76/ASR./2018 RAJINDER KAUR 2 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND HAS ALSO MADE AN ENDORSEMENT TO THIS EFFECT IN THE APPEAL MEMO ON THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AR E DISMISSED. 4. GROUND NOS. 3 & 4 OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER: 3. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 51,32, 812/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PURCHASE OF PROPERTY BEING UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT, IGNORING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE MADE PAYMENT FOR PURCHASE OF PROPERTY FROM BANK ACCOUNT OF HER HUSBAND. 4. THAT IN ANY CASE AND IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER, ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFI RMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 51,32,812/ - WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT OBSERVING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 5. THE BRIE F FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED IMMOVABLE PROPERTY FOR RS.51,32,812/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR EXPLAINING THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COMPLY WITH TH E NOTICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED ORDER U/S 144 OF THE ACT ON 23.11.2016 TREATING THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY AS UNEXPLAINED AND MAKING ADDITION OF RS.51,32,812/ - U/S 69 OF THE ACT. 6. ON APPEAL, BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) THE ASSESSEE FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES IN THE ITA NO. 76/ASR./2018 RAJINDER KAUR 3 FORM OF COPY OF SALE DEED AND BANK ACCOUNT OF THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE SH. RANJIT SINGH AND CONTENDED THAT THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY WAS THE AMOUNT PAID BY HER HUSBAND. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) DID NOT ACCEPT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR NOT FILING THE SAME BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, HE DISMISS ED THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE. 7 . BEFORE US, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE INVESTMENT IN THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY WAS EXPLAINED TO BE OUT OF THE FUNDS OF HER HUSBAND SHRI. RANJIT SINGH AND IN SUPPORT OF THE SAME BANK PASS BOOK OF SHRI. RANJIT SINGH WAS FILED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS). THEREFORE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION. 8. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS). 9. WE FIND THAT IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN MADE U/S 144 O THE ACT AND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICE OF HEARIN G SENT TO HIM AND FILE THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE FOR INVESTMENT IN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY. 10. THE EVIDENCES WERE FIRST TIME FILED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) WHICH COMPRISES O F THE SALE DEED AND BANK ACCOUNT OF THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE SHR I. RANJIT SIGH FROM WHERE THE PAYMENT FOR THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY WAS MADE. ITA NO. 76/ASR./2018 RAJINDER KAUR 4 11. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE EVIDENCES AS THEY WERE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SHOW ANY GOOD REASONS FO R NOT FILING THE SAME BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 12. IN THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX(APPEALS) TO EXAMINE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM TO EXPLAIN THE INVESTMENT OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY OF RS.51,32,812/ - AND THEREAFTER ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AS PER LAW. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 13. NEEDLESS TO MENTION THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) SHALL ALLOW REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE AFRESH . 14 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . (ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT O N 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2019 AT AMRITSAR ) SD/ - SD/ - ( N. K. CHOUDHRY ) (N. S . SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21/06 /2019 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CI T(APPEALS) 5 . DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR