TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirmed entering into agreement to sell with the assessee and giving advance of ₹ 6,50,000. In his statement, he has also explained source of his income. The order-sheet recorded by the Assessing Officer at assessment stage clearly shows that the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to produce Shri Ram Singh for examination and the Assessing Officer recorded further in the order-sheet that the statement of Shri Ram Singh was recorded. It is not in dispute that the statement of Shri Ram Singh has initials of the Assessing Officer even as per the findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax. Therefore, there is no question of doubting the statement of Shri Ram Singh recorded at the assessment stage. These facts, therefore, clearly prove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out carrying out proper enquiry/verification. The assessee was maintaining a savings bank account with Centurian Bank of Punjab Ltd., Sirsa. On-going through the statement of the account, it was found that cash has been deposited on July 8, 2008, in a sum of ₹ 5,30,000 and on July 10, 2008, ₹ 1,34,000 (Rs. 6,64,000). In order to explain the source of the aforesaid cash deposit, the assessee furnished the copy of the agreement dated July 5, 2008, according to which the assessee agreed to sell his plot of land for ₹ 25 lakhs against which an advance of ₹ 6,50,000 was stated to have been received in cash from Shri Ram Singh Beniwal. Later on, this agreement was cancelled and advance was returned. In the said agreement, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome from commission, sale/purchase of property, some interest and agriculture income of ₹ 5 lakhs. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax, therefore, doubted that there is a lack of application of mind on the part of the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer did not make proper enquiry with regard to receipt of the advance of ₹ 6,50,000. The agreement is not registered. The crux of the findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax has been that the source of ₹ 6,50,000 was not properly examined, therefore, the assessment order was set aside and the Assessing Officer was directed to make a fresh assessment after making necessary and proper enquiries/investigation in the light of discussion made in the impugned order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t along with the income from agricultural land. It is also explained that he has shown the transaction in his Income-tax return and he is assessed to tax. PB-22 is the order-sheet recorded by the Assessing Officer. On July 11, 2011, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to produce Shri Ram Singh, the purchaser of the plot on July 21, 2011, and the order-sheet of July 21, 2011, recorded that the Assessing Officer has recorded the statement of Shri Ram Singh and the case was discussed with the counsel for the assessee. PB-24 is the letter of the Assessing Officer dated May 29, 2013, i.e., after passing of the assessment order under section 143(3) on July 21, 2011, whereby the Assessing Officer asked for the explanation of the assessee with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r asked the assessee to produce Shri Ram Singh for examination and the Assessing Officer recorded further in the order-sheet that the statement of Shri Ram Singh was recorded. It is not in dispute that the statement of Shri Ram Singh has initials of the Assessing Officer even as per the findings of the Commis sioner of Income-tax. Therefore, there is no question of doubting the statement of Shri Ram Singh recorded at the assessment stage. These facts, therefore, clearly prove that the Assessing Officer examined this issue in detail at the assessment stage and accepted the explanation of the assessee with regard to advance from Shri Ram Singh and deposit of the cash in the bank account. The Assessing Officer, therefore, made proper enquiries ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xecuted by the assessee with Shri Ram Singh and the receipt of advance of ₹ 6,50,000. The Assessing Officer, on the basis of the audit objection asked for the explanation of the assessee after passing of the assessment order under section 143(3), vide letter dated May 29, 2013 (PB-24). The assessee replied to the said notice (PB-26) and on that, nothing is explained if any action have been taken. Therefore, inference could be drawn that such an audit objection must have been dropped against the assessee. Only after the issue of the audit objection, the Commissioner of Income-tax issued the notice under section 263 of the Act dated February 5, 2014. It is, therefore, clear from the facts and circumstances of the case that the Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
