TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 1401
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,000/- u/s.69 for purchase of Agricultural land without properly appreciating and considering the facts of the appellant. 3. He has erred in law and on facts in not considering the additional evidence furnished by the assessee explaining the source of investment and considering the same in violation of Rule 46A inasmuch as that the same was forwarded to the A.O. who submitted the Remand Report. 4. He has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition u/s.69 in respect of purchase of agricultural land without appreciating the facts that the source of purchase was family funds duly supported by relevant proof. 5. On account of change in address, there was delay in receiving order of CIT(A) resulting into un-intended delay of 12 days which is prayed to be condoned. 6. On the facts, no such addition ought to have been made. 7. The assessee craves leave to add, to alter and/or to modify any grounds of appeal. 3. The assessee in ground No. 1 has challenged the validity of the assessment framed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act. 4. The learned AR before us contended that the time-limit for issuing notice under sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e learned CIT (A). 10. The assessee before the learned CIT (A) contended that he has made investments only in one property for Rs. 50 Lacs only and jantari value of the same was of Rs. 57,06,000/- only. This fact was also admitted by the AO in his remand report dated 24 April 2017. 10.1 Regarding the source of investments in one property, the assessee submitted that the investment in the property was financed by the family members from their saving who were earning the agriculture income since the last many years. The assessee in support of his contention has filed the extract of form 7/12, 8 ledgers and 6 hakka pattal as well as the certificate from the gram panchayat about the annual agricultural income in the hands of the relatives. 10.2 However the AO in his remand report dated 24th April 2017 contended that the certificate about the source of income in the hands of the family members of the assessee was issued by the gram panchayat dated 7th February 2017 after finalization the assessment proceedings and filing of the appeal. Thus such certificate was prepared afterthought and therefore the same cannot be relied upon. There, was no detail furnished by the assessee abo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... entire agriculture income for so many years in cash. In view of these contradictions, the Addl. Evidences were not accepted as the, same are not filed in accordance with the provisions of Rule 46A. Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Ram Prasad Sharma Vs CIT [1979] 119 ITR 867 (All.} has held that the production of additional evidence either before the first appellate authority or the Tribunal was not as a matter of right and in case a discretion was exercised in accordance with law there was no occasion to interfere. Similar view has been taken by Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT Vs Rao Raja Hanut Singh [2001] 252 ITR 528 (Raj.). Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has also affirmed these decisions in the case of Fairdeal Filaments Ltd. Vs CIT [2008] 302 ITR 173 (Guj.)- After considering the report of the AO and the submissions of the AR, the additional evidence is not accepted as the same is in violation of Rule 46A. Moreover, the appellant has filed such incomplete Addl. Evidences which cannot be fully relied in absence of documentary evidences viz. the creditworthiness of the five persons who have allegedly advanced monies to the appellant. Further, the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s furnished the details 7/12 extract/form 8A ledger/form 6 hakkapatra showing agricultural land held them. The assessee has also furnished a certificate from gram panchayat certifying annual agricultural income earned by them. The details of the same stand as under: Name F.Y. 2006-07 F.Y. 2007-08 F.Y. 2008- 09 F.Y. 2009- F.Y. 2010-11 l.ilaha Sajubahs Jadeja 350000 350000 350000 350000 350000 Parakramsingh Sajubha jadeja 250000 250000 250000 250000 250000 Devendrasing Sajubha Jadeja 250000 250000 250000 250000 250000 Ramdevsingh .Sajiibha Jadeja 250000 250000 250000 250000 250000 Liaba Sajubaha Jadeja and Children (Land of Deceased Husband Sajubha Jadeja) 400000 400000 400000 400000 400000 14.2 But, the learned CIT (A) did not believe the version of the assessee on the reasoning as detailed under: (i) No evidence such sales bills of agricultural products, expenses incurred in agriculture etc. in support of agriculture income earned by the family member was submitted (ii) The mode of loan whether in cash or through banking channel was not provided. ....