Rajiv Kumar Khanna, Noida V. ACIT, Circle- 19, New Delhi

ITA 7840/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2934 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Valuation report
• Section: 147; 148; 133A

Judgement Text

Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.7840/Del/2018 [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Rajiv Kumar Khanna, B-1/802, Block-12, Purvanchal Silver City, Plot No.93/01, Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301. PAN-ALWPK1779K vs ACIT, Circle-19, New Delhi APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 19.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement 26.09.2022 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010- 11 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-27, New Delhi dated 09.11.2018. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), is bad, both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. That on the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in making addition Rs.25,75,000/- which was held to be made out of appellant's income from undisclosed sources. The addition of Rs. 25,75,000/- is unjustified and unlawful and, therefore, be deleted. 3. The appellant craves the right to add, delete, alter or amend any ground of appeal.” Page | 2 2. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. It is seen from the records that there is no representation on behalf of the assessee on various occasions. It is also seen from the records that various notices of hearing were duly sent to the assessee which have been returned back unserved by the Postal Authority. The assessee has not provided any other address to the Registry. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee is taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and being disposed off on the basis of material available on record. 3. The only effective ground in this appeal is against the sustaining of addition amounting to Rs.25,75,000/- which was held to be made out of assessee’s income from undisclosed sources. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE 4. Brief facts of the case are that in this case, it is noticed by the Assessing Officer (“AO”) that no return of income was filed by the assessee for Assessment Year under consideration. Therefore, the case of the assessee was re-opened for assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). Requisite notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee after recording the reasons. Ld. Counsel for the assessee attended the proceedings. The AO has recorded that a survey operation u/s 133A of the Act was conducted on 09.07.2014 at the business premises of Mr.Rajiv Khanna. During the survey operation, it was found that the assessee had jointly purchased a property with his father. It is recorded by the AO that a working sheet was found which stated for making of investments. The explanation given by the assessee was Page | 3 not acceptable by the AO. Therefore, he made addition of Rs.25,75,000/- as income from undisclosed sources. 5. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, sustained the addition and dismissed the appeal. 6. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. Ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee has not explained source of investment as narrated in the Excel Sheet. He submitted that the authorities below were justified in making the addition. 8. I have heard Ld. Sr. DR and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. I find that Ld.CIT(A) has decided the issue by observing as under:- 4.2. “I have gone through the submissions and documents available on record. The appellant has agreed that this working was made by him and finally the deal of purchase of property also went through. It is a fact that the appellant has prepared these statements and the contents were known to him but he chose to not disclose them during the statement recorded during survey. Later the applicant has tried to explain that this was the amount payable by cheque on a particular date. But it was observed that the working and the narration submitted by the appellant to explain these entries, do not match the figures and narration in the excel sheet. This excel sheet clearly mention "cash to pay" which can by no Page | 4 stretch of imagination be the remaining cheque amount on a particular date. Further, it mentions cash payable and not the amount or balance or cheque payable. Apart from this, on another excel sheet, there is clear mention of "silver city" at top and total cost at Rs.73 lakhs, registry of Rs.47.5 lakhs and balance of Rs.25.75 lakhs which represents the figures on earlier excel sheet, reproduced in the assessment order. Since the applicant has paid in cheque Rs.47.5 lakhs mentioned in this excel sheet as per the registered value, there is no reason for not relying on other two figures in the same excel sheet. There are ample judgments on this issue that all the figures on same seized material should be accepted and no part figures should be taken. The affidavit of the seller of the property cannot be relied upon as it is self serving document. Further the valuation report was rejected by the AO pointing the faults in non scientific preparation of it and are of no help to the contention of the applicant. Apart from this, the valuation report of one flat cannot be prepared without knowing the foundation and other strength related issues in the building. Further, the valuation report prepared on scientific basis can give the value of cost of construction and not the sale value which has component of land & profit in it. These excel sheets, reproduced in the assessment order, clearly reflecting the nature of transactions in cheque & cash, when read together along with the fact • that applicant could not reply during the statement about this amount, • the narration of the amount in the excel sheet and • the probability of cash involvement in property deals in India existing as a norm Clearly proves the fact that this cash has changed hands in this property transaction. Therefore, I am inclined to uphold the order of the Assessing Officer and addition of Rs.25.75 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer on account of being cash payment made from undisclosed sources is hereby confirmed. The appeal of the appellant is dismissed.” Page | 5 9. From the above finding, I find that the assessee has not contradicted the finding of lower authorities. The assessee has also not filed any contrary evidences in support of his contention. Therefore, in the absence of any contrary material, I do not see any reason to interfere in the finding of Ld.CIT(A), the same is hereby affirmed. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26 th September, 2022. Sd/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER * Amit Kumar * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI