TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 904
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the AIR information obtained by the department showed that the assessee has deposited Rs. 9,12,537/- in his Savings Account maintained with Bank of Maharashtra. A notice u/s.133(6) was issued to the assessee on 30- 01-2012. In response to the same it was stated that the cash deposited was attributable to sale of agricultural land for total consideration of Rs. 25 lakhs out of which the share of the assessee was Rs. 15 lakhs. Verification of the bank statement showed that the assessee had deposited 15 lakhs on 19-02-2008. Since the land sold was a capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) and the assessee had claimed investment in residential house, the AO noted that no proof of investment w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... before him which bears the description of rate, Hamali, Commission, Wastage, Safayi, Freight, advance etc. which was not there in the one produced by the assessee. It was further stated that it was the letter head of the firm which was misused by somebody for issue of fake bill in the name of their firm. In view of the above, the AO confronted the assessee and asked him to furnish his explanation over the above discrepancy. However, there was no satisfactory explanation from the side of the assessee. It was stated that the assessee was producing Mosambi and hence he may be given time till 16-01-2014 to produce the supporting documents from the Talati. The AO summoned the concerned Talati to attend before him along with land records maintai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the land record from F.Yrs. 2004-05 to 2011-12 show the name of Mosambi for F.Yrs. 2006-07 to 2011-12. It was further argued that the AO has not allowed cross examination of the concerned persons whose statements were used against the assessee. It was argued that the provisions of section 69A applied by the AO is also not tenable since there is no finding by the AO with respect to the ownership of money by the assessee. The assessee also argued that provisions of section 44AD will be applicable on the assessee. 7. However, the CIT(A) was also not satisfied with the explanation given by the assessee and upheld the action of the AO. While doing so, he noted that the Talati is an independent Government official and is not an interested ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he said letter as a new evidence under Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules. 9. The CIT(A) further noted that the assessee has also challenged the validity of the notice issued u/s.147/148. The CIT(A) rejected the said ground holding that the said notice was issued on the basis of statement given by the assessee himself. The AO had issued the said notice after recording reasons. The various decisions relied on by the assessee before him were distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the case. 10. As regards the validity of addition u/s.69A is concerned, he held that the said amounts were found to be credited in the bank account of the assessee. Therefore, he was the owner of the amounts by virtue of possession and being in control of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the AO had issued notice u/s.133(6) on the ground that assessee has deposited Rs. 9,12,537/- in his savings account maintained with Bank of Maharashtra. On the basis of various details furnished by the assessee the AO accepted the claim of deduction u/s.54F for Rs. 21,63,300/-. However, the claim of the assessee regarding agricultural income of Rs. 6,55,685/- was denied by the AO on the ground that the assessee could not substantiate the agricultural income. We find the AO rejected the claim of agricultural income mainly on the ground that the 7/12 extracts fo....