TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (8) TMI 1207
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... affected the service through affixation. 2. In response to the notice, the assessee appeared before the assessing officer and submitted that the assessee is residing at house number 868 Krishna Nagar, Ludhiana. It was also submitted by her that she after marriage had started living along with husband had the above said address and therefore the notice issued by the assessing officer was not served upon the assessee. The assessee has sought the copy of the reasons to reopen and the copy of the reasons to reopen were provided to the assessee on 23 February 2013. In the assessment order the assessing officer has mentioned that". On 12.03.2013, the assessee moved an application stating as under: "we are to submit that we are in receipt of copy of reasons u/s. 147/148 and questionnaire dated 07.01.2013 of the Income Tax Act 1961 as issued by your goodself in connection with the subject as above and in reply there to it is submitted as under:- "As regard the reply of questionnaire will be produced on the next date of hearing. As regard, mentioning of agreement of sale consideration of Rs. 38157500/-, it is submitted that no such sale agreement was written. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot received the copy of the assessment order. Further the assessee was not served upon the demand notice issued by the assessing officer dated 28 March 2013. The assessee has inspected the record of the assessing officer and the learned that the demand notice dated 28 March 2013 was sent at wrong address namely at 863 Krishna Nagar Ludhiana, whereas the assessee was living at house number 868 Krishna Nagar Ludhiana. 5. The assessee filed the appeal before the CIT(A) after a considerable delay of 1313 days, in the grounds of appeal before the learned CIT appeal it was mentioned by the assessee as under A. The above appeal is being filed by the Applicant on 05.12.2016 before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the Impugned order. B. The appellant never received the impugned order due to the following reasons:- (a) The Applicant resides at Ludhiana and no one dwells at the following reasons:- (b) the present case proceedings were handled by the Applicants husband. However, he fell seriously ill due to liver and kidney problems. He remained in the hospital for a long time and ultimately demised in June 2016. In the meanwhile, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions in support of condonation of delay as also on merit and also filled the affidavit in support of condonation application for delay. 11. That the Bench on 05.07.2021 had directed the D.R. to produce the case record of the file and to verify whether the assessment order and the demand notice were served upon the assessee at the correct address or not? Thereafter the case was adjourned to 06.07.2021. 12. That on 06.07.2021, Shri Rahul Dhawan, CIT (D.R.) appeared before the Bench along with the record. He had submitted that he had verified from the record that the notices and the assessment order and the demand notice were sent at the wrong address. He had submitted that the in the interest of justice, the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT (Appeals) be condoned in accordance with law. However, it was submitted that in case the Bench wishes to hear the matter on merit, any short adjournment be granted. 13. We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material on record. The perusal of the material available on record and the paper book clearly shows that the assessing Officer had sent the demand notice at incorrect address which is clear from t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....agreement were deleted by the Assessing Officer. He drawn our attention to the order passed in the case of Shri Satnam Singh, the husband of the assessee, at page 2, wherein the A.O. has reproduced as under:- 4 You have purchased property measuring 606.66 Sq. Yards in Krishna Nagar, Ludhiana vide two registration deeds on 23.10.2008. One plot measuring 288.66 Sq. Yards was registered in the name of your wife Smt. Parminder Kaur and other plot measuring 312 Sq. Yards in your name and in the name of your wife Smt. Parminder Kaur at a total purchase price of Rs. 64,10,000/, but as per agreement dated 9.5.2008 the sale consideration of this property is Rs. 3,17,47,450/- as against the registry value. You are requested to disclose the source of investment made at Rs. 3,17,47,450/- and Rs. 64,10,000/-." In response to this question the assessee, vide his reply dated 24.08.2011 stated as under: "As per alleged fake agreement of sale price has been mentioned as Rs. 45,000/- p.sq. Yard. If the calculation is made for the whole property measuring 606.5 sq. Yards, the value comes to Rs. 2,72,92,500/-, whereas in the agreement the total value of sale consideration of Rs. 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed as Rs. 45,000/- per Sq. Yard. If the calculation is made for the whole property measuring 606.5 Sq. Yards, the value comes to Rs. 2,72,92,500/-, where as in the agreement the total value of sale consideration of Rs. 45,000/- per Sq. Yards for 606.5 Sq. Yards has mentioned at Rs. 3,17,47,500/-. It clearly shows that the agreement filed by any person and provided to the assessee by your goodself is clear vindication of forgery to put the assessee as well as department to unnecessary harassment." The assessee explained the source of investment before the Assessing Officer by producing three persons from whom said loans have been raised. The Assessing Officer recorded statement of Sh. Mohinder Singh S/o. Sh. Jagir Singh who stated before the Assessing Officer that he had paid Rs. 25 lacs to the assessee in lieu of his own share in the property. The deponent had however submitted in the affidavit said amount of Rs. 25 lacs had been given as loan to Dr. Satnam Singh. This clearly showed that the statement of Sh. Mohinder Singh was not reliable at all. The Assessing Officer also brought on record the fact of Sh. Mohinder Singh being a petty farmer having 3.25 Acres of land wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvestigation wing of the respondent have recorded the statement of the assessee's husband, wherein he had submitted that he had signed the agreement on 15.08.2008, however, the same was destroyed and thereafter the registry of the plot in question was made on 23.10.2008 for Rs. 64,00,000/-. It was submitted that the said Rs. 64,00,000/- was paid in cash. He has drawn our attention to question No. 5 and 6 and their reply reproduced by the assessing Officer in the assessment order. The learned D.R. relied upon the order passed by the lower authorities. 24. We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of the assessment order passed in the case of late Shri Satnam Singh, husband of the assessee, it is abundantly clear that the agreement dated 09.05.2008 was considered to be fake agreement by the Assessing Officer. The above said fact was also mentioned and confirmed by the CIT (Appeals). However, the Assessing Officer had made the additions of Rs. 19,02,450/- and Rs. 27,50,000/- in the hands of Shri Satnam Singh. The Assessing Officer had made the addition of Rs. 19,02,450/- by giving the following reasons (pag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6. We are also of the opinion that the said agreement was not recovered from the possession of the assessee or from her husband. The said agreement also do not bear the signature of the assessee and also of her husband. Further, the said agreement was never been proved or confronted in original to the assessee during the assessment proceedings and, therefore, the Revenue cannot rely upon the agreement dated 09.05.2008. In our considered opinion, any paper/evidence is required to be proved either by way of primary evidence or by a secondary evidence. In the present case, the document was merely a photo copy, which was not recovered from the possession of the assessee and the said photo copy was not even signed by the assessee. Therefore, the same is not admissible in law. 27. Further, the original of the photo copy was not confronted to the assessee. We are also of the opinion that even the statement of the other signatory on the agreement, namely, Man Preet Singh (witness), Shri Swarup Singh (seller) and Jaswinder Singh (witness) were not recorded by the Assessing Officer for the purpose of proving the undisclosed investment by the assessee or the transaction between the parties....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s own income and invested in the purchase of property. During the course of assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, a questionnaire dated 25.07.2011 was issued and served on the assessee vide Q. No. 4 of this questionnaire the assessee was asked to give evidence regarding source of cash invested in the purchase of property:- Q. No. 4 You have purchased property measuring 606.66 sq. yards in Krishna Nagar, Ludhiana vide two registration deed on 23.10.2008 One plot measuring 288.66 Sq. Yards was registered in the name of your wife Smt. Parminder Kaur and other plot measuring 312 sq. yards in your own name and in the name of your wife Smt. Parminder Kaur at a total purchase price of Rs. 64,10,000/- but as per agreement dated 09.05.2008 the sale consideration of this property is Rs. 3,17,47,500/- as against the registry value. You are requested to disclose the source of investment made at Rs. 3,17,47,500/- and Rs. 64,10,000/-" 2. Though in the order of the assessee, it has been mentioned by the Assessing Officer, the source of Rs. 64.10 lacs have not been explained by the assessee, it is submitted that the total registered value of pro....