Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

DCIT, Range VI, Lucknow Versus Mohd. Zubair Siddiqui, Lucknow

Unaccounted Cash deposits in Saving Bank account in the name of assessee and his brother - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- CIT(A) has held that no addition is called for, as the amount deposited in the joint bank account is agricultural income earned by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has also observed in his order that even after completion of the assessment, independent enquiry was also conducted in respect of receipt from the agriculture produces by the then Assessing Officer through a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e.

Addition made on account of difference of amount of difference of amount between the share profit from various firms shown in the return of income and copy of accounts - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- The difference of ₹ 9,15,044/- was duly explained by the assessee even before the Assessing Officer, but it was not accepted by him whereas the ld. CIT(A) has examined the difference in the light of explanations of the assessee and being convinced with it the addition .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ection 24 of the Act. The assessee was having two properties and one property was self-occupied and ALV was to be computed for another property on which according to the Assessing Officer rent was of ₹ 18,000/- per month and by applying the same, ALV was worked out at ₹ 2.16 lakhs and after allowing standard deduction, interest and borrowed capital as claimed by the assessee, the income from house property was computed to be at ₹ 1,200/-. The Assessing Officer has made addition .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essee. - ITA No.719/LKW/2014 - Dated:- 14-8-2015 - SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, JJ. For The Appellant : Smt. Manju Thakur, D. R. For The Repondent : Shri. Yogesh Agrawal, Advocate ORDER PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A), inter alia, on the following grounds:- 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Lucknow has erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of ₹ 39,31,550/- made on accou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the case in deleting the addition of ₹ 9,15,044/- made on account of difference of amount of difference of amount between the share profit from various firms shown in the return of income and copy of accounts. The contention of the assessee that the difference of amount as shown in return of income as share profit from various firms and claimed as exempt income and as shown in the copy of accounts of the various firm, was actually the share in firms prior the accounting for the firm's .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessee has filed the return of income declaring total income at ₹ 8,03,480/- and agricultural income was shown at ₹ 20,00,750/-. The Assessing Officer has noticed that in the joint SB account in the name of the assessee and his brother, Shri. Sheik Mohd. Tarique with Bank of Baroda, Chowk, Lucknow there is cash credit entries of ₹ 39,31,550/-. The assessee was required to furnish source of these cash credit entries and in response thereto it was stated on behalf of the assesse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion Address Auction Amount 1 Shri Washeem Ahmad S/o Shri WahidAli Sandila, Hardoi 1958000/- 2 Shri Shahid AH S/o Shri ShamatariAli Sandila , Hardoi 2126000/- 3 Shri Nanhay Lal S/o Shri Gurdin Sandila, Harodoi 684000/- 4 Shri Anil Kumar S/o Shri Ram Saran Malihabad, Lucknow 179000/- 5 Shri Saleem Ahmad S/o Shri MazidAli Sandila , Harodi 53000/- 3. The Assessing Officer has analyzed these auction papers and has noticed that the auction papers were not on stamp papers and there are certain discrep .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ime in cash. It was further explained that because most of the auctioneers are illiterate and have no bank account of their own, the auction money was received in cash. Before the ld. CIT(A) he has also filed photocopies of Khasra and Khatauni, auction papers with names and addresses of the persons who took part in the auction of Orchards, Report of Udhyan Adhikari, Lucknow and Report of Tehsildar, Malihabad, Lucknow showing annual income of all five Mango Orchards along with copy of bank accoun .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rned by two brothers i. E. the assessee and his brother, Shri. Sheik Mohd. Tariq. Moreover, in this year, the income of the mother, Smt. Sagira Khatoon is included, as she had expired and her 20% share has also been included in the income of the assessee and his brother. It was further explained that the Assessing Officer has made addition of the entire deposit in the hands of the assessee whereas 50% of the deposits belong to the brother of the assessee. 5. The ld. CIT(A) re-examined the issue .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l raised before me. Ground No. I to IV in respect of addition made on account of income from other sources treating the agricultural income as undisclosed sources of income of ₹ 39,31,550/-. The AO has discussed this issue in para 3 of assessment order for making the addition is that the appellant has failed to furnish the complete addresses of bidder as mentioned supra. The main, contention of the assessing officer is that the authenticity and genuineness of the transaction of sale of man .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nished written submission on the remand report was obtained from AO and counter comment of the appellant on remand report has also been obtained and is placed on record. The contention of the appellant in written submission as well as on the counter comment of the remand report mentioned supra. The finding given by the AO in assessment order and remand report has also been taken on record as mentioned supra. I now proceed to decide the issue before me. It is observed that the appellant has filed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oduce per tree and the sale rate. He has also mentioned the sale consideration received for the year as per local enquiries. The ITI has even mentioned in his report the existence of 30 Bighas of irrigated agricultural land. As per the working of the ITI which the appellant has submitted in response o the Remand report vide reply dated 15th May, 2014 the income from mango trees itself works out to ₹ 65,31,250/-. The ITI has also mentioned the existence of the adult trees on the appellant&# .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o 3 lakhs per annum after deducting the expenses. 12. The appellant in his paper book has also filed the copies of the judgments of the ITAT, Lucknow Bench in his own case as well as his brother who is the co-owner of the lands for A.Y.'s 2006-07 and also the copy of the order the CIT (A)'s for A.Y. 2008-09 in the case of the appellant. On perusal of the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT reveals that the appellant and his brother were deriving agricultural income of ₹ 11,33,200/ eac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ant has disclosed . An income of ₹ 13,42,000/- in his own case. Taking the income of the brother and his mother of ₹ 6.71,000/- the income so disclosed for that year works out to ₹ 33.5 lakhs approx. Looking to the increasing trend of the agricultural produce and income the income disclosed by the appellant and his brother during the assessment year under consideration the income so disclosed and as deposited in the joint bank account of ₹ 39,31,550/- cannot be said to be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ik Mohd. Tariq was also filed with the same AO wherein he has not made any addition on account of unexplained deposits, treating the agricultural income as undisclosed income. I find that the AO has not brought any material on record which would justify the entire deposits in said bank account as belonging the appellant. 13. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case I hold that the AO was not justified in making an addition of ₹ 39,31,550/- in the present case and treating .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sel for the assessee has contended that this is not the first year in which the assessee has shown agricultural income. The assessee owned Orchards which were auctioned to various auctioneers and the auction money was deposited from time to time in the joint bank account of the assessee with his brother, Shri. Sheik Mohd. Tariq and his brother has also claimed agricultural income for the impugned assessment year at ₹ 20,00,750/- equal to the agricultural income earned by the assessee which .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eposit in the joint bank account, in the hands of the assessee. Copies of the return filed by his brother, Shri. Sheik Mohd. Tariq and joint bank account are placed on record. Copies of the orders of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case for assessment year 2006-07 and also in the case of his brother are filed before us, in which the Assessing Officer himself has admitted agricultural income at ₹ 11.20 lakhs in the hands of the assessee. Now the assessment year involved is 2010-11 and th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he orders of the lower authorities in the light of the rival submissions, we find that the assessee owned agricultural land in the form of five Mango Orchards. In order to establish the ownership of the Mango Orchards, copies of the revenue record i. E. Khasra and Khatauni were also placed before the lower authorities and there is no specific finding by the Assessing Officer denying the ownership of the Orchards by the assessee. Once the assessee is held to be the owner of the Orchards, there ha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y was received, it was deposited in the joint bank account of the assessee and his brother, Shri. Sheik Mohd. Tariq. The total cash deposit was of ₹ 39,31,550/- whereas the assessee and his brother claimed agricultural income to be at ₹ 20,00,750/- each and in the hands of the brother, no addition was made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee has also placed copy of the return of his mother in order to establish that the mother was expired during the year and agricultural income ea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

espect to the production of Mangoes from these Orchards and also report of the Income Tax Inspector. Keeping in view the reports, the ld. CIT(A) has held that no addition is called for, as the amount deposited in the joint bank account is agricultural income earned by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has also observed in his order that even after completion of the assessment, independent enquiry was also conducted in respect of receipt from the agriculture produces by the then Assessing Officer thro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 8. Apropos ground No.2, during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer has noticed from the details of capital investment that the assessee has shown profit on business at ₹ 20,65,710.14 from different firms which is as under:- Sl. No. Party s name Profit 1 epublic Service Centre 20,191.94 2 Metro Cargo Carriers 6,59,382.20 3 Republic Auto Sales 13,86,136.00 Total 20,65,710.14 9. However, in the return of income the assessee has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that in the first chart the figure of profit mentioned at ₹ 20,65,710.14 in capital account is the profit after deducting the firm s taxes, from the firms in which the assessee is a partner and nothing else. Similarly, as per second chart the figure of profit mentioned at ₹ 29,80,754/- in capital account is the profit before deducting the firm s taxes, from the firms in which the assessee is a partner. The Assessing Officer has not accepted the contentions of the assessee in the lig .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at on making addition, the Assessing Officer has ignored, rather failed to appreciate the fact that the amount of ₹ 29,80,754/- claimed as exempted income in the return of income is actually share in the firm prior to accounting for the firm s tax and in effect it does not make any difference, as actually the share income from firm is tax free as per the provisions of section 10(2A) of the Act and moreover that amount of ₹ 29,80,754/- has not been credited in the books to invoke the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion of ₹ 9,15,044/- under the head of unexplained cash credit u/s 68. The appellant did not have business income and was thus not required to maintain books of accounts and Balance Sheet. Hence the provisions of sec 68 do not apply on the present set of facts and circumstances. The appellant has also filed the copies of the Audit Report and computation sheet of the different firms from where the appellant is deriving share profit. The figure of profit as claimed exempt is duly verifiable .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

enue has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and has placed heavy reliance upon the assessment order whereas the ld. counsel for the assessee has placed reliance upon the order of the ld. CIT(A), with the submission that the difference was duly explained before the lower authorities, but the Assessing Officer has not appreciated the explanations that the amount of ₹ 29,80,754/- claimed as exempted income in the return of income is actually share in the firm prior to the accounting of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

see and being convinced with it the addition was deleted. The ld. D. R. has not pointed out any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). Moreover, the ld. CIT(A) has taken cognizance of the correct facts while deleting the addition. Since we find no infirmity therein, we confirm his order on this issue. 15. Apropos ground No.3, it is noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction under section 24 of the Act. The assessee is having two properties namely Flat No.1, Tower-11, Metro City, Paper Mi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the Act. The Assessing Officer has considered monthly rent of this property at ₹ 18,000/- considering the area and locality of the property and accordingly calculated the ALV at ₹ 2.16 lakhs and after allowing 30% standard deduction of ₹ 64,800/- and interest on borrowed capital as claimed by the assessee at ₹ 1.50 lakhs, made an addition of ₹ 1,200/- as income from house property. 16. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with the sub .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

his submission on this aspect in his reply dated 29lh April 2014 mentioned supra. Considering the submission given by the appellant given in the assessment proceeding as well as in the appellate proceedings I find that the property in question has still not be delivered to the appellant till date. The appellant was also required to file proof of the same in response to which he has filed a copy of the letter dated 17lh December 2013 addressed to General Manager Finance, Rohtas Projects Limited, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version