9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urnment application moved on 4.10.2011 was rejected. None appeared on behalf of the counsel who had appeared on 3.10.2011 i.e. Shri Ravinder Bindlish. In view there, the appeal was taken up for hearing and the learned D.R. for the Revenue put forward his contention. The assessee has filed written submissions on record in respect of the grounds of appeal raised, which were considered. 3. The assessee has raised following Ground Nos. 1 and 2 of Appeal: "1. That the impugned order is against facts and law and without jurisdiction. 2. That the worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 21,53,000/- and Rs. 20,00,000/- by wrongly treating the genuine deposit in the bank as an unexplained cash credit. 4. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is general in nature and hence is dismissed. 5. The brief facts of the case are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted various deposits in various bank accounts. Further information was received through AIR Data as per which cash of Rs. 37,85,000/- was deposited in the saving account with Centurion Bank of Punjab, Phase-VII, Mohali. The assessee was asked to explain the source of deposits with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of sale of H.No.2100, Phase-X, Mohali has been furnished by the assessee. As stated in his statement the assessee has further sold this property through agreement to sell dated 20.07.05 to Shri Major Singh, Vill: Pandori Khatrian, The: Zira, Distt. Firozepur. It is worthwhile to mention here that the assessee has received the consideration on account of sale of the same property from two different persons, meaning thereby that he had forfeited these amounts as none of them has come forward for execution of sale deed though a period of more than 3 years has elapsed and still the assessee stated that the negotiations is going on. The Assessing Officer also found contradiction in the agreement to sell executed by Shri Major Singh and even enquiries were made though the Inspector. Even the copy of the documents furnished by the assessee was incomplete and page No.2 of the agreement relating to terms and conditions was missing and when questioned the copy of receipt of Rs. 25 lacs was filed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer vide paras 9.2 to 9.7 at apges 4 to 6 has deliberated upon the transactions entered into by the assessee and the contents of the agreement to sell and in view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aterial on record. Looking at the facts and material on record, I am also of the view taken by the AO that everything has been worked backwards which means that in order to explain cash deposits, the story of two agreements has been narrated. In fact, there is nothing at all with the appellant to establish the authenticity of his tale and the transactions contained therein. Who would believe that one person gives Rs. 20 lacs for purchase of a property and then backs out and simply forgets about this huge sum ? There is no evidence of any effort/negotiation between the parties before the appellant forfeits Rs. 20 lacs. After that another person steps in, gives Rs. 21,53,000/- and happily suffers the same fate. I have enquired from Estate Office, Mohali regarding the ownership of the said property and even today it vests with assessee's wife as is clear from the documents procured from the Estate Office clearly implying that there was neither any need nor occasion to sell this property or else it would have been sold by now. Points (i) to (vii) of AOs observations (supra) are very lucid & logical. Agreeing with the AO, I hold that the story narrated to explain the cash credits de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 21,53,000/-. Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is thus dismissed. 9. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee is as under : 3. That the worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- deposited through account payee cheque in the bank without appreciating the facts of the case in correct perspective." 10. In respect of deposit of Rs. 10 lacs in the bank account on 3.5.2005 the assessee claimed that the same was out of withdrawal from PNB, Dehradun during the period 6.12.2004 to 3.5.2005. 11. The CIT (Appeals) held has under "13. Perusal of the bank accounts reveal that the amount stands credited to assessee's account No.22SB16023953 maintained with Centurion Bank of Punjab, Phase VII, Mohali through clearing with particulars "clg/PNB/434605 by C" on 13.05.2005. According to the assessee, this amount was transferred from Punjab National Bank, Dehradun Account vide cheque No.434605 but the perusal of account statement of that account (page 55 of assessment record) sent by the Punjab National Bank, Dehradun indicates no such transfer on 03.05.05. Even the assessee's account No.18050001000441100 with Punjab National Bank Sector 17, Chandigarh does not in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f this cash deposit remained unexplained. The addition of Rs. 5 lacs so made is therefore confirmed, dismissing assessee's appeal on this ground." 16. The plea of the assessee is that the first cash totaling of Rs. 8,50,000/- was withdrawn on various dates from HDFC bank out of which Rs. 5 lacs was deposited in Centurion Bank of Punjab. The deposit of Rs. 8,50,000/- in HDFC Bank account on 18.5.2005 is out of funds transferred from another account and has no relation with the cash withdrawals on the earlier dates. Copy of bank statement of HDFC bank is placed at page 71 of the Paper Book. Perusal of the said ban k statement reflects that there were earlier cash withdrawals totaling Rs. 8,50,000/- and thereafter there is an entry of funds transferred totaling Rs. 8,50,000/-. We find merit in the plea of the assessee. However, the same needs verification at the level of the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to readjudicate the claim of the assessee in respect of deposits of Rs. 5 lacs. The issue is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with direction to decide the same after verifying the claim of the assessee. Reasonable opportunity of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of son of the assessee. Merely because the amount has been received by way of cheque does not satisfy the provisions of the Statute in respect of the cash credits received by the assessee during the year. The onus not having been discharged by the assessee in respect of deposits in the bank account, the deeming provs sof section 68 are applicable. We find no merit in the ground of appeal raised by the assessee and hence the same is dismissed. 22. Ground No.6 raised by the assessee is as under : "6. That the worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 50,000/- to the total income without appreciating the facts and written-submissions made during the assessment proceedings." 23. The Assessing Officer observed as under : "As regards deposit of Rs. 50,000/- made in cash on 07.09.2005 as per details and information of investment with Centurion Bank of Punjab filed with reply dated 19.12.2008, it is stated to be out of sale proceeds of H.No. 2059 Sector 71, Mohali for which the assessee was GPA of his son as well as stated in the answer to Q.No.28 of the statement recorded. As per copy of sale deed whole the sale consideration has been received by Bankers' cheques N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000/- made in Centurion Bank of Punjab remains unexplained." 28. The CIT (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 29. We are in agreement with the order of the CIT (Appeals) in the absence of the assessee having furnished any evidence and having failed to discharge its onus of establishing the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction. The addition made is hereby upheld and ground No.7 raised by the assessee is thus dismissed. 30. Ground No.8 raised by the assessee is as under : 8. That the worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,00,000/- ignoring the submissions made before ld. AO. 31. The aforesaid addition was made on account of non-disclosure of interest income from the bank accounts which was upheld by the CIT (Appeals). We are of the view that as the necessary information was not provided by the assessee and none-declaration of interest income in return of income, the Assessing Officer had no alternative but to estimate the interest income in the hands of the assessee. Even before us the assessee has failed to provide the requisite information. In the totality of facts and circumstances, upholding the order of the CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
