TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1025
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the 42 days. The ld. DR had not made any objection against the submission of the ld. AR. Accordingly, the delay of 128 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following concise grounds: "1. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals), has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in issuing the notice u/s 148 and with regard to reopening of the case. 2. That there was no reason to believe as per the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, which is sine quo for the purpose of forming the reason to believe and, thus, the proceedings as initiated u/s 148 deserves to be quashed. 3. That the reason to believe as formed by the Assessing Officer are merely on the basis of cash deposits in the bank account, is not proper and it is securely covered as per the judgment of ITAT, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar in the case of Sh. Amrik Singh and also as per the judgment of the Delhi Bench in the case of Sh. Bir Bahadur Singh Sijwali. 4. Notwithstanding the above said grounds of appeals, the addition of Rs. 39,05,000/- on account of cash deposits in the bank account is highly unjustified and written submissions along with details submitted before the Assessing officer and also th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....High Court). 7. The ld. DR only relied on the order of the revenue authorities. 8. We heard the rival submission and relied on the documents available in the record. In the referred cases are not come under the factual matrix of the assessee's case. We respectfully relied on the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana RakeshGupta vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula, [2018] 93 taxmann.com 271 (Punjab & Haryana) "This judgment does not support the petitioner's case. It is clearly distinguishable. As noted in the earlier part of paragraph 9, the Supreme Court held that the reasons recorded by the ITO for initiating proceedings under Sections 147 and 148 were not in accordance with law. As in that case, the Commissioner merely accorded permission under Section 151 without stating any reason himself it is axiomatic that his order would also not be in accordance with Section 151. The case before us is entirely different. We have found that the reasons recorded by the AO justify the initiation of proceedings under Sections 147 and 148. As the Principal Commissioner agreed with these reasons, it was not necessary for him in his order according sanction to reiter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....44. 9.2. The ld AR argued that one more statement of Sh. Dara Singh (witness to sale deed dated 29.03.2010) was also recorded on 11.12.2017 wherein he accepted the cash payment of Rs. 90,00,000/- by Sh. Umed Singh & Others to the assessee and other co-owners in his presence. The copy of the statement of Sh. Dara Singh is forming part of APB at Page 45-49. 9.3. The ld. AR placed that in addition to above, one report dated 10.12.2017 of the handwriting expert Sh. H.S Mander, Barnala was filed with the ld. AO which confirms the fact that the signatures of Sh. Umed Singh on Photocopy of receipt dated 23.03.2010 matches with the signatures put on his statement recorded on oath before income tax authorities. The copy of the report is forming part of APB at Page 60-67. 9.4. The ld. AR argued that during the course of appeal proceedings, the assessee also filed copy of report dated 07.12.2018 of the handwriting expert Sh. H.S Mander, Barnala who confirms the fact that the signatures of Sh. Umed Singh on agreement (Ikrarnama) dated 06.10.2009 matches with the signatures put on his statement recorded on oath before income tax authorities. The copy of the report is forming part of APB at P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this connection, the report is submitted as under: - 2.1 In order to find out actual state of affairs about correctness of contents in the so called "Ikarnama", from the purchaser Shri. Umed Singh Dabas, summons u/s. 131 of the I.T Act,1961 was issued to him to verify the correctness of contents in the "Ikarnama". The compliance thereto Sh.Umed Singh Dabas filed an affidavit stating therein as under:- 1. That I have purchased the land situated at Village Dhabi Tek Singh, Tehsil Narwana ,Distt. Jind, Haryana' from Shri. AjaibSingh,Harjinder Singh &Harbans Singh Sons of Shri.BalbirSignh. 2. That the total amount for the purchase said agriculture land has been paid through demand raft to the said sellers which the detailed has been mentioned in the registry and the copy of registry already submitted in the office of ITO, Mansa Ward-1(4) and no cash payment was made in the said transaction. However, I have already given my statement in the office of ITO, Mansa Ward. 1(4) on 4.12.2017. 3. That it is my true and correct statement. " Shri.Umed Singh Dabas the purchasers has also filed another affidavit in response to this office letter dated 12.2.2019 vide which a copy of s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0,50,000/- from his saving bank account. After giving benefit of these amounts totalling to Rs. 30,50,000/-, the source of balance cash deposit of Rs. 39,05,000/- (Rs. 69,55,000/- minus Rs. 30,50,000/-) remained unexplained. As the assessee has failed to furnish any explanation with regard to nature and source of said cash deposits, the source of cash credit amount of Rs. 39,05,000/- is unexplained to the department. In view of the provisions of section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the unexplained investment of Rs. 39,05,000/- is deemed to be income of the assessee for the Financial Year 2009-10 from undisclosed sources and the same is charged to tax in the Asstt. Year 2010- 11. 6.3 Since the assessee has concealed the particulars of his income to the tune of Rs. 39,05,000/-, I am satisfied that it is a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, proceedings u/s 271 (1) (c) are being initiated separately." 11. The ld. AR relied on the order of the ITAT, Amritsar Bench in the case of Sh. Jagsir Singh vs. ITO, ITA No.202/Asr/2019 date of order 10.08.2022. The relevant para 7 to 8 are extracted as below: "7. Further, related to agre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee produced sale deed as well as bank 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 subsequ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ayment of consideration has been established 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 The dates of deposit of cash as well as cheques in the bank accounts of the sellers, their sons, grandsons and wife are clearly matching to the dates of agreement to sell and sale deed i.e. 11/5/2005 and 11/8/2005. AH the deposits of cash in the bank accounts of these persons were made on the very next day of execution of agreement and sale deed respectively. In absence of any other source of income of the sellers, the only inference which can be drawn from the details of the bank accounts and particularly the deposits made on the particular dates which is just one day af....