TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant by : Shri K. C. Aneja , Adv. Respondent by : Shri Om Parkash , Sr. DR ORDER PER KUL BHARAT , JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010- 11 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Karnal dated 12.10.2018. 2. The assessee has raised following ground of appeal:- 1. That the allegation by the Hon ble Commissioner Appeal Karnal on the assessee that he failed to discharge his onus in establishing the genuineness of the land transaction and deposit in his bank account are wrong and unjustified. The case of Dinesh Kumar Jain (Late) Through (Legal Heir Ankit Jain) vs PCIT, [2018], 407 1TR-65(DEL) has not applied on me. 2. That the Ld. AO and Hon ble Commissioner Appeal Karnal has not considered the Assessee s reply that he had sold the agriculture land during the Financial Year 2008-09 relevant to the Assessment Year 2009-10. Which is wrong and unjustified and against the natural justice. 3. That the Ld. AO and Hon ble Commissioner Appeal Karnal has wrongly assumed the total sales consideration of agriculture land as Income which is illegal and unjustified. 3. The only effective ground in this appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel for the assessee submitted that both the authorities below have not adverted to the submissions of the assessee. 8. On the contrary, Ld.Sr.DR opposed these submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. 9. I have heard the contentions of Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Ld.CIT(A) has decided the issue by observing as under:- 3.4. Findings:- I have examined the facts of the case and the submissions made by the assessee. An addition of Rs. 17,10,000/- was made u/s 69A of the IT Act, 1961 being unexplained cash credit. The A.O. has dwelt with, in length, in his order on the reasons for making the said additions. The relevant extract of the assessment order is reproduced as under:- During the period under consideration the assessee engaged in the business of commission agent of food grains. The information furnished by the assessee is placed on record and has been examined. The case was discussed with the AR of the assessee. The details of cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee is as under;- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Perusal of information following facts are emerged in this case i) During the proceedings vide reply received in this office on 10.08.2017 the assessee has stated that he has sold a property on 05.01.2008 for a consideration of Rs. 25,00,000/-. During the proceedings the assessee has enable to substantiate his claim by way of not providing the copy of sale deed computation of income i.e. calculations of capital gain etc. for the relevant period i.e. financial year 2008-09 (05.06.2008 to 31.03.2009) relevant to assessment year 2009-10. ii) The assessee has further stated that he had given advance of Rs.20,00,000/- to Shri Naveen Kumar on 24.07.2008.. The assessee has not furnished any documentary evidence i.e. capital account, copy of balance sheet etc. for the year ending 31.03.2009 to establish the genuineness of the transaction. Moreover, on perusal of affidavit it is noticed that no specific/practical reason of cancellation of deal between Uncle and Nephew is stated. Why both the blood related persons were involved in a deal and without any specific reason the same is being cancelled. It is pertinent to mention here that original agreement of sale of land (cop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is not part of the balance sheet. It is clearly transpires that the assessee has made the transactions of the account from the bank account which is not the part of the accounts books of the assessee. Keeping in view this fact that the account of the assessee is not part of the account books of the assessee and no transaction has been made through banking channels, the assessee could not established the genuineness of the transactions even after availing sufficient and numerous opportunities. It is settled dictum of law that prima facie onus is always on the assessee to prove the cash credit entries found in the books of account in the assessee. In landmark cases like Kale Khan Mohammad Anif Vs. CIT (1963) 50 ITR 1 (SC), Roshan Di Hatti Vs. CIT (1977) 107 ITR (SC) vide which it is held that onus of providing the source of a sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him. Where the nature and source thereof cannot be explained satisfactorily, it is opened to the revenue to hold that it is the income of assessee and no further burden is on the revenue to show that the income is from any particular source. It may also be pointed out that the burden of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the deposit in his bank account. Therefore, the provisions of Section 69A of the IT Act, 1961 are squarely attracted in this case. The burden of proof was on the assessee which was not discharged satisfactorily by him by a satisfactory explanation or substantiated by evidence. The Hon ble Delhi HC had in the case of Dinesh Kumar Jain (late) (through legal heir Ankit Jain) vs PCIT, [2018] 407 ITR 65 (DEL) in its order dated 08.08.2018 has held that given the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, it was clearly proved that the assessee failed to explain deposits of cash to the satisfaction of the authorities below. Hence, the appellant's plea was dismissed. On the identical factual matrix, this case is covered by the judgment cited above. Hence, the addition is confirmed. The grounds of appeal are dismissed. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 10. From the above finding, it is clear that Ld.CIT(A) has not adverted to the submissions of the assessee that the amount was deposited out of the sale consideration of the agricultural land. The factum of execution of Sale Deed is well established from the Sale Deeds filed by the assessee. I find that ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
