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 →

Sunil Kumar Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-Behror

2016 (9) TMI 853 - ITAT JAIPUR

Unexplained investment in agricultural land - Held that:- Non-admissibility of the agreement and the receipt, is not required to be adjudicated as in our view there is no investment in the purchase of the agricultural land and merely the statement of the assessee cannot be considered to be admissible piece of evidence to show that the some crystallized right in the form of investment were made by him in the agricultural land. Since we have held that the agreement in the receipt are nonest in 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

hat ₹ 11 lacs were received by him from Sh. Hukum Singh and Satveer Singh. This said persons have duly explained the source of the source. Further ₹ 22 lacs were received by the assessee from his father would also be many plausible explanation of receipt of 22 Lacs as sale consideration for the sale of his land from one Sh Gopi Ram. The assessee himself had produced the receipt of the ₹ 6,00,000/-received on account of sale of his Tractor. Thus the assessee was able to explain .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

T(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of ₹ 50,00,000/- on account of alleged unexplained investment in agricultural land. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is stated to be an agriculturist and has not filed any return of income. The return was filed by the assessee on 17/10/2011 in pursuance of the notice received U/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) dated 15/09/2011. In the said return of income, the assessee had shown total inc .....

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. ₹ 20 lacs on 14/7/2008 and ₹ 30 lacs on 30/11/2008. The ld Assessing Officer asked vide order sheet dated 26/10/2012 to produce documentary evidence in respect of the investment made by the assessee . During the assessment proceedings, the assessee produced various documents in the form of affidavit from his father Shri Bharat Singh, affidavit of Shri Satyaveer Singh and other documents. The ld Assessing Officer had also recorded the statement of Shri Deer Pal and Shri Hukam Sing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

above facts only reveal that the appellant has failed to furnish any evidence even at the stage of appellate proceedings with regard to the sources of funds for the purchase of agricultural land for an amount of ₹ 50 lacs. All the efforts or the explanations given by the appellant have been examined by the AO and were found to be self serving in nature and without any supporting evidence. In view of these facts, I hold that AO was justified in making an addition on account of unexplained .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a pre-determined mind. The explanation and the evidences in respect of each of the issues raised by the lower authorities is as under:- (i) The fact that assessee is only having ½ share in the land purchased through agreement from Sh. Prem Chand is evidenced by the consent deed duly notarized on 21.06.2008 made on a stamp paper dated 27.03.2008, where Sh. Hukum Singh and Sh. Satveer have given the consent that assessee can get the agreement in his name for the entire land as they are una .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

wner of this land. (ii) Sh. Hukum Singh has contributed ₹ 11 lacs in purchase of this land. In support of the source of this investment, evidence of sale of agricultural land by him for ₹ 5,87,000/- on 01.09.2008 was filed. Further, from his bank account, there is a withdrawal of ₹ 1,60,000/- on 25.11.2008. In his statement, he has stated that his annual agricultural income is ₹ 2 lacs. He also stated that has given ₹ 8 lacs to the assessee about 5 years back. All 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

davit where he stated that he has given his share in the sale proceeds to Satveer. Thus, the source of fund in the hand of Satveer to give his contribution for purchase of land is fully established. The lower authorities have not given any cognizance to these documentary evidences and therefore the finding of lower authorities in this connection is incorrect. (iv) Sh. Bharat Singh, father of the assessee, has given ₹ 22 lacs to the assessee for purchase of the land. Sh. Bharat Singh in his .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

amount of ₹ 22 lacs out of the sale proceeds of the land for ₹ 43,60,000/- on 05.05.2008. His bank account also shows a deposit of ₹ 48 lacs on 06.05.2008 out of which he has withdrawn ₹ 40 lacs on 10.06.2008 out of which ₹ 22 lacs was given to Sh. Bharat Singh on 20.06.2008. All these evidences clearly proves that Sh. Dheerpal gave ₹ 22 lacs to Sh. Bharat Singh who gave this amount to the assessee for the purchase of land. All these facts are confirmed by Sh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

₹ 6 lacs with the assessee for making payment towards purchase of land. This documentary evidence was ignored by the CIT(A) in holding that assessee has failed to furnish evidence with regard to sale of truck or receipt of money. Thus, the source of ₹ 6 lacs for investment in the land is fully established. He further submitted that the lower authorities have made the addition on account of unexplained investment in purchase of agricultural land u/s 69. It is a fact on record that as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

w of Hon ble Supreme Court decision in case of CIT vs. P.K. Noorjehan 237 ITR 570. In this case, assessee was a Muslim lady aged 20 years. She made certain investments in land. The explanation of assessee regarding the source of the purchase money for these investments was that the same were financed from out of the savings from the income of the properties which were left by her mother s first husband. The said explanation offered by the assessee was rejected and addition was made u/s 69. The 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

xplanation of the assessee was liable to be rejected, s. 69 of the Act conferred only a discretion on the ITO to deal with the investment as income of the assessee and that it did not make it mandatory on his part to deal with the investment as income of the assessee as soon as the latter s explanation happened to be rejected. According to the High Court, the Tribunal had not committed any error in taking into account the complete absence of resources of the assessee and also the fact that havin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

As pointed out by the Tribunal, in the corresponding clause in the Bill which was introduced in Parliament, the word "shall" had been used but during the course of consideration of the Bill and on the recommendation of the Select Committee, the said word was substituted by the word "may". This clearly indicates that the intention of Parliament in enacting s. 69 was to confer a discretion on the ITO in the matter of treating the source of investment which has not been satisfac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t as the income of the assessee if the explanation offered by the assessee is not found satisfactory and the said discretion has to be exercised keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the particular case. In the instant case, the Tribunal has held that the discretion had not been properly exercised by the ITO and the AAC in taking into account the circumstances in which the assessee was placed and the Tribunal has found that the sources of investments could not be treated as income of 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

es, addition u/s 69 is not justified. In view of above, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is unjustified and the same be deleted. 5. At the outset, the ld DR has vehemently supported the order of the ld CIT(A) and has submitted that the assessee has made an investment of ₹ 50 lacs on 14/7/2008 and 30/11/2008 and the assessee has failed to prove the source of such investment. It was submitted that even the witnesses produced by the assessee in support of this case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nto between Shri Prem Chand, S/o- Shri Ram Narayan, R/o- village Shahpur, Tehsil Bawal, district Rewari through power of attorney holder Shri Anil Kumar and the assessee. In the said agreement, it is mentioned that the total consideration of the property agreed between the parties was ₹ 54 lacs. Out of the said ₹ 54 lacs, a sum of ₹ 20 lacs were received by Shri Prem Chand through Shri Anil Kumar on 10/06/209 and the remaining amount of ₹ 30 lacs was received was Shri Pre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

361;रोड, तहसील मुण्डवर, जिला- अलवर 10.06.2009 करकेमु 20.00.000/- रूपया (बीस लाख रूपया) आज रोज नकद रोबरू गवाहान ë .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessing officer has also not put any question with respect to the validity of the said consent Deed if we admit the consent deed, then the assessee would only be owner of half of the property though, the agreement of sale was executed in his favour for the entire property. Out of the total sale consideration of 54 Lacs Hukum Singh and Satveer Singh collectively contributed ₹ 22 lacs. Thus in our opinion the the conjoint reading of the consent deed and the statements of Hukum Singh, clea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

पने जो 50.00.000/- (पचास लाख) रू. का इकरारनामा (जमीन का) किया है उस सौदे की रजिस्ट्री कराया भी या नही .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0;धार पर किया था तथा इस जमीन के मालिक श्री अनिल कुमार पुत्र श्री बलवान के बीच किया हे , इसल& .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on the basis of this agreement, no transfer of property can take place. In view thereof, the reliance of the revenue on the terms and conditions mentioned in the agreement or by the assessee to claim that the property has been purchased by the assessee, in our view, is not in accordance with law. The revenue as well as the assessee have failed to produce any revenue record after the alleged purchase of the property in the year 2008 to show that the land was transferred in the revenue record fro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd legal documents executed between the assessee and the seller. The assessing officer has not recorded any statement of the Seller under section 131 of the Act, to show that the said land was sold by him for a valuable consideration to the assessee. The statement of seller namely Shri Prem Chand or his attorney have not been recorded by the ld Assessing Officer, which could prove the receipt of the amount by the said persons from the assessee. Therefore, in our view, revenue was not right in co .....

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