TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 860X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i N. R. S. Ganesan, JM And B. R. Baskaran, AM,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri R. Krishnan, FCA For the Respondent : Smt. S. Vijayaprabha, Jr. DR ORDER Per B. R. Baskaran, Accountant Member:- The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06-11-2012 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Trivandrum and it relates to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The assessee is challenging the decision of Ld CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.31.50 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 68 of the Act in respect of deposits found in the bank accounts of the assessee. 3. The facts relating to the issue are stated in brief. The assessee is a teacher by profession. The Assessing Officer received information to the effect that the assessee was in receipt of bank interest from IDBI bank and HSBC bank. Further she had invested a sum of Rs. 10.00 lakhs in Reliance Mutual Fund. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer requested the assessee to furnish the relevant details. From the bank accounts of the assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had made deposits to the tune of Rs. 20,75,000/- in HSBC Bank and Rs. 10.00 lakhs in IDBI Bank. It was also noticed tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an to the assessee, the details of payments made to the assessee are given. In the subsequent mails, the assessee had requested Shri Alwin Chellappan to furnish a confirmation letter with regard to the payments made by him. According to the Ld. AR, the purchaser refused to furnish the confirmation letter fearing that he may be subjected to enquiries in this regard. The Ld. AR further submitted that these facts were brought to the notice of the Ld. CIT(A) but the first appellate authority rejected the copies of the e-mails on the plea that it does not bear the signature of the purchaser of the property. The Ld. AR submitted that the e-mails do not bear the signature of the senders. He further submitted that the assessee did not have any control over the purchaser of the property after the sale of property and also after the execution of the sale deed. Though the assessee put efforts to obtain a confirmation letter, she could not obtain the same from the purchaser of the property even though the son of the purchaser has confirmed the details of payment of Rs.33,50,000/-. The Ld. AR further submitted that these payments were made by way of demand drafts and cheques only. Accordingly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee is that she had purchased the said property during the financial year 1998-99 for a sum of Rs.29.57 lakhs. These facts clearly show that the said property could not have fetched a price of only Rs.7.50 lakhs as shown in the conveyance deed, that too after expiry of about 10 years from the date of purchase. It is not the case of the AO that the said property was sold under distress situation. Hence, the sale price of Rs.7.50 lakhs shown in the sale deed does not fit into the logic of human probabilities. 8. Now we shall examine the claim made by the assessee about the sale consideration of Rs.33.50 lakhs. The assessee (e-mail : sushi.krish@gmail.com) has mainly placed reliance on the e-mail correspondences she made with the son of the purchaser named Shri Alwin Chellappan (alwintrv@yahoo.com). The assessee has filed copies of following e-mail correspondences. (a) E-mail dated 19-11-2010 sent by Shri Alwin Chellappan to the assessee giving details of payments made aggregating to Rs.33.50 lakhs. (b) E-mail dated 10-12-2010 sent by the assessee to Shri Alwin Chellappan requesting for confirmation letter. (c) E-mail dated 20-12-2010 sent by the assessee to Shri Alwin ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other details relating to the creditors including the income tax index numbers also. However, the said creditors could not be produced by the assessee before the AO. Hence, the assessing officer issued summons u/s 131 of the Act to the creditors, but they were returned with the endorsement "Left". There after the AO did not make any attempt to examine the source of credits. Hence, the AO added the cash credits to the total income of the assessee and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the same. The Tribunal, however, deleted the addition and the same was confirmed by the High Court. On further appeal filed by the revenue to the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Hon'ble Apex court confirmed the order of the Hon'ble High Court with the following observations:- "In this case, the assessee had given the names and addresses of the alleged creditors. It was in the knowledge of the Revenue that the said creditors were income-tax assessees. Their index numbers were in the file of the Revenue. The Revenue, apart from issuing notices u/s. 131 at the instance of the assessee, did not pursue the matter further. The Revenue did not examine the source of income of the said alleged credito ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
