TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1443X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Stonegate Trinity LLP filed in this regard as above. We accept the grievance of the assessee as genuine and accordingly, we hereby delete the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer and confirmed by CIT appeals. Decided in favour of assessee. - Dr. M. L. Meena, Accountant Member And Sh. Anikesh Banerjee, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Ashray Sarna, CA For the Respondent : Smt. Rajinder Kaur, CIT (DR) ORDER PER DR. M. L. MEENA, AM: These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the impugned order even dated 26.12.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals-2), Jalandhar (hereinafter referred to as the CIT, Appeal ) in respect of the Assessment Year 2009-10, wherein the assessee has challenged the decision of the CIT appeal, confirming the addition of Rs. 11,13,83,314/- and Rs. 1,00,0 4919/ in respect of assessment year 2006 07 and 2007 08 on account of deposit in the foreign bank account ignoring the fact that the assessee was not a beneficiary of the said account and that assessee s name was struck off from the account on 11.06.2004 when M/s Soverign Holding Private Ltd became owner of this foreign bank account. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edings submitted that he has not maintained any bank account with HSBC Bank, Geneva and is a permanent resident of Vill. Dhandowal, Tehsil Shahkot. It is also stated that he is an illiterate and purely agriculturist. It is stated that he has visited UK on tourist visa three times for stay period ranging from 1 month to 2 months, each time. The appellant has filed an affidavit stating that he does not have any connection with the above mentioned bank account. The appellant has stated that from the details given by the AO based on the information received from outside India, it is indicated that this account pertains to Rajinder Singh Chatha, his nephew, who is a resident of UK. The appellant was asked to substantiate his contentions with evidence by the AO and in response to this, it was stated that he is unable to produce his nephew or any other evidence to prove the sources of deposits in the bank account. 4.13 In the meantime, certain more documents were received by the AO from competent authority under DTAC, which revealed that appellant has maintained the bank account in HSBC Bank and transactions have been made through that account. These papers were again confronted to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bank or from his nephew Shri Rajinder Singh Chatha to support his statement. The onus lies upon the appellant under the provisions of section 69/69A of the IT Act which has not been discharged even in the course of appellate proceedings. 4.18 The appellant has in the counter comments repeated the contentions given earlier and also stated that Shri Rajinder Singh Chatha has paid all the taxes on the amount outstanding in the impugned bank account to the Revenue Authority of UK and a certificate of CA of Shri Rajinder Singh Chatha was also enclosed. 4.19 This being new evidence was admitted in the interest of principles of natural justice and forwarded to the AO for examination. The AO in the remand report has pointed out that this certificate has been issued by the Chartered Accountant/Tax Advisor on the request of Shri Rajinder Singh Chatha and does not qualify as a legal certificate or document under any law and therefore, do not have any legal or evidentially value. It is also submitted that impugned document does not mention or contain any specific reference to any communication from the UK Tax Authorities as to whether the disclosures made by Shri R.S. Chatha have b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng comments was received :- .3. I believe that HSBC account No, 11276695 is a Swiss (Geneva) account and therefore we are unable to obtain this on your behalf. It may be that the Swiss tax authorities can assist you here. However, you will see (Appendix I (see 2 above) includes three credit advices. 4. I note that the HSBC account in the name of Sh. Joginder Singh Chatha is denominated in US$ whereas the HSBC Account No. 11276695 is denominated in pound sterling. I can confirm that the transactions referred to in your Annexure B have not been disclosed in the disclosure report. The disclosure report only refers to HSBC account No, 11276695 in the name of Joginder11; the other accounts referred to are in the name of Sauvignon Holdings Ltd. 4.24 These facts and contradictions emerging there-from were confronted to the appellant as it is categorically stated in this report that It is also confirmed that the transactions referred in this account have not been disclosed in the disclosure report . But in response to this, the appellant has only reiterated the submissions filed earlier. The appellant has failed to furnish any further material on record to prove h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was opened by Sh. Rajinder Singh Chatha who was nephew of assessee and assessee is not the beneficiary of the said account. He never opened any bank account at Geneva, assessee never visited in bank for opening any type of account. It is opened by his nephew Sh. Rajinder Singh Chatha residing in UK. 3. That it is worthwhile to mentioning here that during assessment the Ld. Assessing Officer supplied us detailed account profile of the impugned account on the basis of which notice u/s 147/148 were issued. That from the first page of that account which is it is evident as under (PAGE 73-74 of Appeal Set): a. Assessee is only a linked profile in this accounts and this more significant when it is specifically mentioned in this document that even correspondence with assessee is also blocked on 11.06.2004. b. The name of assessee was closed in this account on 11.06.2004. c. Asssessee was not beneficiary of this account, whereas the beneficiaries were Sh. Rajinder Singh Chatha and M/s Sauvignon Holdings Ltd. d. First owner of this bank account is Chatha Rajinder Singh and beneficial owner is M/s Sauvignon Holdings Ltd and assessee name Joginder 11 is CLOSED. (PAGE 74 of Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reation of profile and date of creation of account are different. Therefore, date of creation of profile does not necessarily mean date of closure of account. Moreover, the date of last modification made in the said account is indicated as 31.07.2007 Sir, in this regard it is submitted that all these comments made by the Ld. Assessing Officer belongs to M/s Sauvignon Holdings Ltd. because date of creation i.e. 07.04.2004 mentioned by the Ld. Assessing Officer in his comments on the basis of bank statement is of M/s Sauvignon Holdings Ltd. Date of Sh. Joginder Singh Chatha is 25.03.2003 and closed on 11.06.2004 but there is no date of closure mentioned in profile of M/s Sauvignon Holdings Ltd., which proves that beneficial owner is M/s Sauvignon Holdings Ltd. Sh. Rajiner Singh Chatha not assessee Sh. Joginder Singh Chatha. 4. That Sh. Rajinder Singh chatha has paid all the taxes on the amount outstanding in this impugned bank account to the revenue authority of U.K and in this regard we had already filed certificate of C.A. of Sh. Rajinder Singh Chatha. (PAGE 63 of Appeal Set, copy of certificate reproduced by Ld. AO). 5. That in order to cross verify the facts as stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inder Singh Chatha which is an authentic copy as certified by HM Revenue Customs (HMRC), it is clarified that, ..when the account was first opened with HSBC it had the name Joginder 11 (the actual date of opening being 23 March 2003) the full name of the registered account holder being Mr. Joginder Singh Chatha (the Indian resident Uncle of Mr. Rajinder Singh Chatha ). This account was closed and a new one opened in April,2004 the new account being in the name of Sauvignon Holdings Ltd., the shareholder of which is HSBC Trust Company (BVI) Limited as Trustee of India Trust the purported settler of which was Mr. Joginder Singh Chatha. At all times. However, Mr. Rajinder Singh chtha has been regarded by the bank as ultimate beneficial owner and on whose instructions they have acted. Therefore the underlying assets treated as belonging directly to Mr. Chatha. Sir, the impugned account was opened in the name of assessee on 25.03.2003. i.e A.Y 2003-04 and name of assessee was struck off from the account on 11.04.2004 i.e A.Y 2005-06. The year under consideration are A.Y 2006-07 2007-08 so, if for the argument sake it is presumed that money was deposited in these account even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Thus, the AR argued that the assessee was not beneficiary of this account but Sh. Rajinder Singh Chatha and M/s Sauvignon Holdings Ltd. were the beneficiaries of this account earlier and absolutely with effect from 11.06.2004, where first owner name of this bank account changed as Chatha Rajinder Singh and beneficial owner as M/s Sauvignon Holdings Ltd was introduced on 07.04.2004 and thereby assessee s name Joginder 11 is Closed. (APB page 74). 8. Admittedly, the name of the assessee Shri Joginder Singh Chatha was withdrawn from this account from 11.06.2004 i.e A.Y 2005-06. It is pertinent to mention that the assessment years under consideration are A.Y 2006-07 2007-08 and so, when the name of assessee was withdrawn prior to the date 01.04.2005 which is relevant to assessment year 2005-06, then no addition can be made in the hands of assessee in the assessment years under consideration as he was not owner of this impugned account in both the assessment year under consideration. Accordingly, the appellant assessee is not answerable to explain the deposits in this account made in the financial year 2005 06 and 2006 07 relevant to assessment years under appeal where the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
