VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF;D LN L; DS LE{K BEFORE:SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, J M VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 980/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI KALU RAM MEENA A-32, JAI KISHAN COLONY TONK ROAD, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ITO WARD- 6 (2) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: ADZPM 6589 J VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANIL KUMAR SHARMA CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY: SHRI RAGHUVIR SINGH DAGUR, ADDL.CIT - DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 27/06/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 /06/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BHAGCHAND, AM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A)- II, JAIPUR DATED 09-10-2013 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2009-10 RAISING THEREIN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,35,000/- TREATING AGRICULTURE INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES ITA NO.980/JP/2013 SHRI KALU RAM MEENA VS. ITO, WARD- 6 (2), JAIPUR . 2 2. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,61,065/- TOWARDS DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES CLAIMED AGAINST INTEREST INCOME 3. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 19,65,000/- TOWARDS CASH DEPOSITED INTO THE BANK HO LDING THE SAME AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 4. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN IGNORING THE ADDITIONAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD RELEVANT TO ABOVE SAID GROUND NO. 3. 2.1 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRESSED THE GROUND NO. 1 AND 2. HENCE, THE SAME ARE DISMISSED BEING NOT PRESSED. 3.1 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE FOLLOWING WRITTEN SUBMISSION PRAYING THEREIN TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 19,65,000/- MADE TO THE RETURNED INCOME. GROUND NO. 3 AND 4 : 1. THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR HAS MADE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.26,00,000/- IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT NO.14 370272247 OF CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, AS FOLLWS:- DATE AMOUNT 02.06.2008 200000/- 02.06.2008 100000/- 03.06.2008 900000/- ITA NO.980/JP/2013 SHRI KALU RAM MEENA VS. ITO, WARD- 6 (2), JAIPUR . 3 .11.2008 1400000 TOTAL 2600000/- 2.THE ASSESSEE VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 19.12.2011 EXP LAINED THAT THE CASH RECEIVED FROM M/S BLUE LINE MARKETING PVT. LTD. AGA INST SALE OF LAND OF RS.2600000/- ALONG WITH AGRICULTURE INCOME HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN TO THE BANK. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION FILED THE CONFIRMATION LETTER (PB NO.1) AND COPY OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET OF M/S BLUE LINE MARKETING PVT. LTD. (PB NO.2-9) IN 4. THE AO ALLOWING THE SET OFF OF RS.635000/- TOWAR DS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES HELD BALANCE OF RS.1965000/- AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME U/S69A OF IT ACT 1961. 5. THUS THE AO REJECTED EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSE E TOWARDS CASH RECEIPT OF RS.2000000/- FROM M/S BLUE LINE MARKETING PVT. L TD. AGAINST SALE OF LAND. 6. THEREBY THE AO MADE THE RELEVANT ADDITIONS OF RS .1965000/- TO RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CONFIRMATION LETTER AND COPY OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET OF M/S M/S BLUE LINE MARKETING PVT. L TD. 8. THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE IS APPEARING IN THE DET AILS OF LOANS AND ADVANCES SHOWN UNDER SCHEDULE-D OF THE AUDITED BALN CE SHEET OF M/S M/S BLUE LINE MARKETING PVT. LTD.(PB NO.6) 9. THE AO WITHOUT MAKING ANY INQUIRY FROM M/S BLUE LINE MARKETING PVT. LTD. AND WITHOUT HAVING ANY OTHER MATERIAL ON RECOR D HAS REJECTED EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. 10. THE AO HAS NOT GIVEN ANY REAL FINDING TO DISPRO VE THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.980/JP/2013 SHRI KALU RAM MEENA VS. ITO, WARD- 6 (2), JAIPUR . 4 11. THE ASSESSEE DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS SUBMI TTED THE COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 03.05.2008 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE ASS ESSEE AND M/S BLUE LINE MARKETING PVT. LTD. AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENC E.(PB NO.10-13) 12. THE LD. CIT(A) IGNORED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ON THE GROUND THAT NO APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED U/R 46A OF IT RULES 196 2, EXPLAINING THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHY THE SAME WAS NOT FILED BEFORE THE AO. 13. THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS COULD NOT COLLECT THE RELEVANT AGREEMENT DATED 03.05.2008, FR OM M/S BLUE LINE MARKETING PVT. LTD., THEREFORE THE SAME COULD NOT B E FILED BEFORE THE AO. 14. THE AGREEMENT DATED 03.05.2008 GOES TO ROOT OF THE MATTER THEREFORE THE SAME MAY KINDLY BE PLACED ON RECORD AND MAY KIN DLY BE CONSIDERED FOR DISPOSAL OF THE CASE. 15. APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENC ES IS BEING FILED FOR KIND CONSIDERATION OF THIS HON. BENCH. 16. THEREFORE CASH DEPOSITED IN TO THE BANK MAY KIN DLY BE CONSIDERED AS EXPLAINED AND THE RELEVANT ADDITION OF RS.1965000/- MADE TO RETURNED INCOME MAY KINDLY BE DELETED. 3.2 THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN AP PLICATION UNDER 29 OF INCOME-TAX APPELLATE RULES, 1963 FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES IN THE MATTER OF KALURAM MEENA. THE LD. AR OF THE A SSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT COLLECT THE COPY OF AGR EEMENT DATED 03-05- 2008 FROM M/S. BLUE LINE MARKETING (P) LTD. EXECUT ED BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND M/S. BLUE LINE MARKETING (P) LTD. FOR SALE OF AGRICULTURE LAND, THEREFORE, THE SAME COULD NOT BE FILED BEFORE THE AO. THE ABOVE SAID ITA NO.980/JP/2013 SHRI KALU RAM MEENA VS. ITO, WARD- 6 (2), JAIPUR . 5 AGREEMENT DATED 03-05-2008 GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER FOR DISPOSAL OF GROUND NO. 3 OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THUS TH E LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE PRAYED TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES A ND PLACE ON RECORD FOR DISPOSAL OF RELEVANT GROUND OF APPEAL. 3.3 THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES AND OPPOSED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES RAISED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE. 3.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FEEL THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SHOUL D BE ACCEPTED AND ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN ONE MORE CHANCE TO CONTEST HIS CASE FAIRLY AND JUDICIOUSLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) . HENCE, THE ASSE SSEE IS DIRECTED TO SUBMIT THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD. CI T(A) FOR RE-ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUE IN QUESTION AND COOPER ATE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE IT AFRESH BY CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES RAIS ED BEFORE US AND PROVIDING THE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR ST ATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.980/JP/2013 SHRI KALU RAM MEENA VS. ITO, WARD- 6 (2), JAIPUR . 6 4.0 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/06/2 016. SD/- SD/- YFYR DQEKJ HKKXPUN (LALIET KUMAR) (BHAGCHAND ) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 30/06/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI KALU RAM MEENA, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD- 6 (2), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 980/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR