2019 (11) TMI 321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... submitted in appellate proceedings by simply referring to some paras of the order of the Ld. AO and by copy paste of the remand report. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A), is not justified while upholding the orders of the AO in sustaining the addition by relying on the dumb documents/ inadmissible evidences i.e. photocopies of some alleged 'bayanas' without even the signatures of the assessee-appellant. 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the additions on account of so called 'bayanas' particularly when even both the alleged parties to bogus/forged bayanas also denies any agreement entered between them. 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the additions without appreciating the fact that all the investments made for purchase of land was made out of sale proceeds of 18 Kanal Land at Village Aahar. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard and disposed off." 2. However, at the time of hearing, ld. AR inviting attention to ground No. 2 raised in the appeal submitted that the legal issue may be decided first as the orders of the authorities have been passed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ilable in the facts of the present case also. It was submitted that when the said reasoning is compared with para 1 of the assessment order where the AO takes note of the fact that the assessee has returned income of Rs. 1,69,320/-+ Agriculture Income of Rs. 1,20,000/- by way of filing of return on 17.10.2012, the principle invoked by the ITAT in the said decision, it was submitted, becomes fully applicable to the facts of the present case also. 6. The ld. Sr.DR maintaining his request submitted that the matter may be remanded. It was also submitted that the ld. AR is incorrect in arguing that re-opening has been directed purely on the grounds that the return was not filed. Reading from the reasons recorded, it was his submission that the re-opening has been necessitated purely on account of the fact that the assessee had acquired an immovable property and paid for the same in cash by an amount aggregating to Rs. 75,85,000/-. Thus even if the return had been perused, the fact of available cash to the extent noticed necessitated and needed examination and consideration as the meager returned income suggested escapement of income. The reason to believe, it was argued is sufficient....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Kurukshetra. (emphasis supplied) 8.1 We find on a reading from the order of the ITAT in the case of Manpreet Singh Bhamra (cited supra) relied upon by ld. AR the following reasons were made available on record before the Co-ordinate Bench: "Sh. Manpreet Singh son of Sh. Hardeep Singh Bhamra has made various investments in Bank during the financial year 1 999-2000 and has not filed any income tax return and source of in these banks deposits remained unexplained. The above said cash deposits in the above said bank is from undisclosed sources. I, therefore, have reasons to believe that investment of above income of the assessee for the assessment year 2000-2001 under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has escaped assessment as income of the assessee for the assessment year 2000-2001 under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961." 8.1.1 In view of these facts, the Co-ordinate Bench concluded the issue in the following manner : "7. We have heard the rival submissions. The Assessing Officer recorded the reasons for re-opening of the assessment mainly on the reason that assessee has not filed any return ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd reports, if any on the past history of the assessee, if need be and of course providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 9. Addressing ground No.3, the ld. AR inviting attention to the impugned order submitted that the CIT(A) has extracted submissions of the assessee in pages 1 to 10 of his order. Thereafter, discussing the facts as available in the assessment order and extracting the remand report of the AO at pages upto 12, the issue was concluded by the CIT(A)at page 13 in the following manner : "11. It is, therefore, dear that the discrepancies pointed out by the A.O. 2 not been rebutted. Hence, the assessee's contention that the statement of the ties denying entering into the agreement cannot be relied upon. For example-, fact that signature of one of the persons, Sh. Manoj Kumar, recorded in the statement before the A.O. and also in one of the agreements match. Moreover, the witness in that particular case, Sh. Rajesh Kumar confirmed the transaction before the A.O. (Para 6.3 of the assessment order). In view of the detailed and logical findings of Assessing Officer, I confirm the said additions in respect of various property transactions am....