TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 228
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion, invalid and abinitio void. Without prejudice to the above Ground No.2:- The Id. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the appellant on his ground that in the case of the appellant notice u/s 148 was issued by the successor Assessing Officer (Sh. Dinesh Kajot,ITO,Ward- 1,Kishangarh) on the basis of reasons recorded by his predecessor Assessing Officer ( Sh. Radhey Shyam Verma, ITO, Ward-1, Kishangarh). Since the Ld. AO who had issued notice under section148 was different than the officer who had recorded the reasons, therefore, the notice issued u/s 148 was bad in law and deserves to be quashed. Ground No.3:- The Id. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the appellant on his ground that ITO , Ward-1,Kishangarh erred in invoking clause (a) of Explanation-2 of section 147 without fulfilling the mandate of proviso to section 147 and issuing notice u/s 148 on the basis of his fallacious assumptions, surmises, conjectures and wrong facts . Therefore, the notice issued by him is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. Ground No.4:- The Id. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the appellant o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on for admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules. The ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the AO on the additional evidence filed by the assessee as well as source of deposit in the bank account claimed by the assessee. The AO submitted remand report wherein the objection raised by the assessee were dealt with by the AO as well as the claim of the assessee was also examined by the AO. The AO in the remand report pointed out that though there is sale of land measuring 4 bigha and 6 vishwa vide sale deed dated 09.04.2009 however, as per sale deed the sale consideration is shown as Rs. 6,45,000/- only and not Rs. 27,50,000/- as claimed by the assessee. Except the sale deed the assessee has not produced any other documentary evidence or material to show that the sale consideration of the land sold by the assessee along with other joint owners was more than Rs. 6,45,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the remand report as well as submissions of the assessee has restricted addition of Rs. 21,05,000/- after giving the credit of Rs. 6,45,000/- being the sale consideration of the land mentioned in the sale deed. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ank account and also detailed submissions in respect of the source of cash deposit made in the bank account. The ld. C(IT(A) called for remand report wherein the AO has pointed out that the sale deed dated 08.04.2009 shows the sale consideration of Rs. 6,45,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) has consequently allowed the claim of the assessee only to the extent of Rs. 6,45,000/- as stated in the sale deed. The Bench has raised a query about the discrepancy in the name mentioned in the sale deed and the name of the assessee appearing in other records. The ld. AR has pointed out that the assessee Shri Pappu Ram is also known as @ Prabhu Ram. Thus, in the sale deed of the name of the assessee appearing as Shri Prabhu Ram. After verification of the record we are satisfied that the name appearing in the sale deed alias name of the assessee. The AO has also not disputed the fact that the assessee is one of the joint owners of the land which was sold vide sale deed 08.04.2009. We further note that the cash of Rs. 27,50,000/- was deposited in the bank account of the assessee with Oriental Bank of Commerce, Kishangarh on 09.04.2009. The date of cash deposit is subsequent to the date of sale deed dated 08....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the sale deed dated 11/8/2005. Therefore, even if the said agreement is not enforceable in law due to the non-bearing of the signature of the assessee and further due to non-registration, the contents of the said agreement which has been proved and corroborated by the sale deed go to establish the existence of the agreement between the parties. Further the details of the cash deposited in the bank account of the sellers and their relatives has been reproduced by the Assessing Officer in the assessment proceedings at page No. 4 and 5 of the assessment order as under: S. No. Name of person Bank account No. Deposited cash amount Date Relation with the seller 1. Smt. Dhapu Devi Meena 210501000 00001 32,74,000/- 12/08/2005 Seller of land 2. Sh. Dulharam Meena 1007813 1,50,000/- 10,00,000/- 1,60,000/- 14/05/2005 12/08/2005 16/08/2005 Do 3. Sh. Ballu Ram Meena 1007108 4,00,000/- 11,70,666/- 14/05/2005 12/08/2005 Do 4. Sh. Harphool Meena 1004534 11,70,667/- 12/08/2005 Do 5. Sh. Satendra Basanwal 1007978 14,00,000/- 12/08/2005 Son of Sh. Bagwataram Seller 6. Sh. Rajendra Kumar Meena 1003946 1,50,000/- 14,00,000/- 12....