TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3/10/2006 occurs after a cash deposit in the same account on the same date. In any case, these so called loan repayments from the above said account appear to be unique when compared to other transactions in the bank account. Also, all these transactions in the bank account had happened subsequent to the ACB search on the appellant's father and the requisition made u/s 132A by the Income Tax Department. Therefore, it can be inferred that this arrangement was made to explain to the authorities the investment in the name of the appellant. Addition confirmed - Decided against assessee. - ITA No. 680, 681, 682/Mum./2020 - - - Dated:- 24-6-2022 - Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member And Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Judicial Member For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Smt. Shailja Rai ORDER PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned orders of even date 30/11/2019, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ learned CIT(A) ], for the assessment year 2003 04, 2004 05 and 2007-08. 2. When these appeals were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Learned CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts while upholding the addition of Rs.2,93815/- made by AO by treating Agricultural income as income from other sources without there being any seized / incriminating material found as a result of search. 4.2 The learned CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts while not appreciating that the Appellant could not reflect this income earlier as his total income for this year was below taxable limit and he was not under obligation to file ITR u/s 139. 5. The brief facts of the case, as emanating from the record are: The assessee is an individual and derives income from agriculture. On 27/07/2006, a search was conducted by the Anti Corruption Bureau, Thane, at the office and residents of the father of the assessee. Photocopy of the seized materials was handed over to the Income Tax Department and pursuant thereto notice under section 153A(a) of the Act was issued requesting the assessee to prepare a true and correct return of income. After various reminders, the assessee finally filed return of income on 21/11/2008, for the assessment year 2003 04, declaring total income of Rs.2,94,454. The Assessing Officer, vide assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d report and reproduced above, and also considering the provisions of the Act that even in cases which are covered u/s 153C of the Act, section 153C(1) provides that the jurisdictional Assessing Officer shall Issue notices and assess or reassess the total incomes of such other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that assessing officer is satisfied that the books of accounts or documents or assets seized or requisition have a bearing on the total income of such other person, therefore, the objection raised by the appellant that the proceedings mentioned in the assessment orders being 153A r.w.s. 143(3) is bad in law is rejected. .......... 8.2 As is evident from the details of assets listed in the AO's letter dated 28/05/2008 which is reconstructed on the basis of the details of assets and income in the Panchanama dated 27/07/2006 that there are details of assets and income which have been found in the case of Amit N. Sanap. Since the appellant has never filed a RO ls 139 (1) for AYS 2002-03 to 2006-07, before the date of execution of requisition u/s 132A (20/09/2000); the above details of assets and income found as a result of the requisition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aimed for the first time in the ROI filed in response to Notices u/s 153A of the Act. As no claim of exempt agricultural income was made by the appellant for AYS 2003-04 and 2004-05, the same cannot be claimed u/s 153A of the Act as the proceedings for AYS 2003-04 and 2004-05 are unabated proceedings. Reliance is placed on the judgments of various courts as under which have laid down the law that if any claim of exemption or deduction has not been made in the original ROI either u/s 139(1) or 139(5), the same is not allowable u/s 153A of the Act in unabated proceedings. 11.2 Judgment in Jai Steel (India) Vs. ACIT (2013) 259 CTR (Raj) 287 held that in an assessment under section 153A, it is not open to the assessee to seek deduction or claim relief not claimed by it in the original assessment which already stands completed before the date of initiation of the search or making of requisition The Hon ble Rajasthan High Court held as under: The plea raised on behalf of the assessee that as the first proviso provides for assessment or reassessment of the total income in respect of each assessment year falling within the six assessment years, is merely reading the said provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deduction can be made by the ass in view of the above on by the Ld Counsel for the and absence of any section The Ld Departmental Representative the order of the CIT(A) holding that assessee is not entitled to make a fresh claim in the return u/s 153A when no such claim was made in the original return of income has to be upheld. The ground raised by the assessee are accordingly dismissed. The above decisions were favorably referred and approved by the Mumbai ITAT (5 of ALL Cargo Global Logistics (147 TTJ 613) as under: 15. The third line of the argument of the Ld Counsel is based on the premises that in proceedings u/s 153A, the assessee cannot raise a new or fresh claim in this connection, reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Suncity Alloys (P) Ltd. (supra) and Charchit Agarwal (supra). We have seen that the finding in the case of Suncity Alloys (P) Ltd. (supra) is that proceedings u/s 163A do not constitute de novo assessment. The assessee la precluded from raising any fresh claim after expiration of the time allowed to file revised return a 139 (5) Therefore, no such fresh or revised claim can be raised in assessments made 153A Similar finding has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceedings, pursuant to the receipt of material from Anti Corruption Bureau, Thane, from the Balance Sheet filed along with the return of income, it was, inter alia, observed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee has taken loan of Rs. 26 lakhs for Wine Shop licence. The assessee was asked to give loan confirmation, creditworthiness, cashflow statement and other documentary evidences along with proof of the persons who has given loan and their income particulars. The Assessing Officer, vide order dated 29/12/2008, passed under section 143(3) r/w section 154B(b) of the Act, inter alia, made an addition of Rs.26 lakhs as unexplained credit under section 68 of the Act in the absence of any documents / details being filed by the assessee. 15. In appeal, the learned CIT(A), vide impugned order dated 30/11/2019, inter alia, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee observing as under: 18.0 I have examined the addition of Rs.32,47,826/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and the corresponding submissions in support of the appeal. The details of the loans are as under:- Table 6: Details of loans of Rs.32,47,826/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble 7,00,000 Total Consideration 33,00,000 As can be seen from the above table, the source of the loan and even the source of the sources appear to be all in cash and an arrangement made to explain the credits In the hands of the appellant to the extent of Rs. 26,00,000/-. Even the claim of repayment of loan doesn't appear to be genuine as from the bank statement of Prakash Gore in Parvara Sahakari Bank Ltd., It is seen that loan claimed to be repaid to P.N. Yadav and E.K. Kapase of Rs. 5,00,000/- and 4,00,000/- respectively on 23/10/2006 occurs after a cash deposit of Rs. 12,00,000/- in the same account on the same date. In any case, these so called loan repayments from the above said account appear to be unique when compared to other transactions in the bank account. Also, all these transactions in the bank account had happened subsequent to the ACB search on the appellant's father and the requisition made u/s 132A by the Income Tax Department. Therefore, it can be inferred that this arrangement was made to explain to the authorities the investment in the name of the appellant. In view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
