2014 (5) TMI 747

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....peal and has upheld the deletion of the additions made by the Assessing Officer ['the AO'] on account of alleged unexplained income, unexplained investment, and unexplained purchase of agricultural land. Put in brief, the relevant background aspects of the matter are that the assessee, an individual and deriving income from agricultural activities, filed the return of income on 16.05.2008 in compliance of the notice under Section 148 of the Act, declaring the income of Rs. 5,23,403/- from long term capital gain and from other sources; and also declared agricultural income of Rs. 6 lakhs. The AO proceeded to complete the assessment by the order dated 29.12.2009, making addition of a sum of Rs. 34,00,000/- (10,00,000/- + 20,10,000/-+3,90,000....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8 issued to him. Sales to Shri Ashok Kumar Goyal is also evident from the fact that the appellant could not complete the transaction with Shri Jessa Ram as he had no further funds. The deferment of payment noted on the backside of Ikrarnama dated 15.10.2003 is sufficient testimony to this fact. On overall consideration of the facts, it is held that the AO was not justified in making the impugned additions. The same are, therefore, deleted. " As regards, the other addition to the tune of Rs. 3,90,000/- on account of investment made in agricultural land in the name of son of the assessee, the CIT(A) found this addition too unjustified while observing as under:            "I have considered t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ished for our perusal) has taken a similar view. Therefore, the statement of Shri Jessa Ram which was never put to this assessee is of no avail and on the basis of that unrebutted statement no addition can be made. Otherwise also, the backside of the ikrarnama the payments between 04/06/2004 to 15/01/2005 are not recorded although these were made and have been accepted by the A.O. There is no evidence and it is not the case of the revenue that assessee has got any other source of income. A sale of the portion of the land to Shri Ashok Goyal stands proved from the Registered Deed itself. The deposits made by Jessa Ram in his Bank account are not and cannot be taken as a proof of receipt from this assess on that particular date. Shri Jessa Ra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rent findings recorded by the CIT(A) and ITAT are essentially the findings of facts and have obviously been rendered after due appreciation of the material on record, as also on the relevant considerations. The ITAT appears justified in observing that Shri Jessa Ram was neither examined in the presence of the assessee nor was allowed to be cross-examined by the assessee and hence, his statement could not have been relied upon against the assessee. The ITAT has also rightly observed that the deposits made by Shri Jessa Ram in his bank account cannot be taken as proof of the receipt from the assessee-respondent on that particular date. Obviously, the procedure and system of accounting of a third party was not a matter within the control of t....