TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 957
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant. 2. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify, substitute or delete any ground or grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of the appeal." 3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that a search & seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Act was carried out on 28.09.2017 at the various premises of Jain Plywood House Group, Jaipur. Consequent to that search, resident premises of the assessee was also covered. The assessee has declared Business and profession income from firm M/s. Arun Oil Industries, income from house property from Jain Plywood House & Cottage Handicrafts Textiles, Interest income from saving bank, NSC and FDRs. Original return of income u/s 139 of the Act was filed on 03.02.2015 declaring a total income at Rs. 8,42,670/-. Consequent to the search notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued to the assessee on 25.07.2018, in response to notice, assessee filed her return of income on 17.08.2018 declaring total income at Rs. 8,42,670/-. 3.1 The assessment proceedings after filing of return as per section 153A were initiated by the DCIT, Central Circle -1, Jaipur. In that assessment proceeding the ld. AO noted that during the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not accepted. The assessee has furnished the false story only. She has not furnished the source of Rs. 5,00,000/- paid to Shri Hari Narayan Sharma. Therefore, in absence of the source of Rs. 5,00,000/- the same added to the total income of the assessee as unexplained investment u/s 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the I. T. Act, 1961. 4. Aggrieved from the order of assessment the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals-4, Jaipur. Apropos to the grounds so raised the assessee, relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is reiterated here in below: "4.2 I have considered the facts of the case and written submissions of the appellant as against the observations/findings of the AO in the assessment order for the year under consideration. The contentions/submissions of the appellant are being discussed and decided as under:- Fact remains from the assessment order that a copy of Ikrarnama dated 30.08.2013 between Shri Harinarayan Sharma (as a seller resident of Village - Balawala, Tehsil - Sanganer) and Smt. Kanta Devi Jain (as buyer) regarding sale of agricultural land at Balawala for Rs. 70 lacs per bigha was found and seized as Page no. 1-4 of Exhibit-2 where amou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e learned AO for their cross examination and however the same has not been done. In view of the above discussion there is a conclusion to be arrived that the cash payment was made by the appellant Without prejudice to the above, when a document is found during the survey, as per the legal fiction specifically provided in the Income Tax Act, the contents of the same are to be presumed to be true. Such presumption is provided under section 292C of the Act. It is undisputable that the document was found with the appellant in the survey action. The document is made on a stamp paper and signed by the receiver of the money and by two witnesses. It is also indisputable that in the document it is mentioned that cash payment of Rs. 5 lakhs has been done by the appellant. The appellant is one of the parties to the agreement. The contents of the document are not in dispute. The appellant has challenged the correctness of the contents of the document. The contention of the appellant to challenge the correctness of the contents of the document is hit by the presumptions provided under section 292C of the Act. The section reads as under Presumption as to assets, books of account, etc. 29....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onclusion to be arrived at is that payment of Rs. 5 lakhs as mentioned in the above referred agreement was actually done by the appellant to the seller of the property. And since the appellant has not disclosed this payment anywhere, the source of this payment remains unexplained, the AO has rightly treated it from the unexplained income of the appellant. In view of the above, this ground of appeal of the appellant is hereby dismissed." 5. As the assessee did not find any favors, from the appeal so filed before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has preferred the present appeal before this tribunal on the ground as reproduced hereinabove. To support the various grounds so raised by the ld. AR of the assessee, he has relied on the written submissions in respect of the only addition of Rs. 5 lac made in the hands of the assessee. The contention raised in the written submission reads as follows: "During search operations on the appellant, a copy of ikrarnama was found from the premises of the appellant dated 30.08.2023 for sale of disputed agricultural land by one Mr. Ghan Shyam Sharma for Rupees Seventy Lakhs out of which advance payment was mentioned as Rs. 5,00,000/-. The said ikrarn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ge 5 drew a table from the said agreement wherein the payment of Rs. 54,00,000/- has been shown at serial no.3 but no cheque/UTR no. has been mentioned against said amount. At the same time we observe that an amount of Rs. 50,000/- each has been shown to have been paid by the assessee through cheque no. 100095 and 100096 which has been admitted by the assessee before the A.O. with an explanation that it was token amount but thereafter the assessee changed his mind and came out from the deal of purchase of property. The said agreement was not signed by the assessee and the same was only signed by the builder, except this agreement there was no documentary evidence in the hands of A.O. in support of his claim that the assessee has paid of Rs. 54,00,000/- in cash out of his income from other undisclosed sources treating the same as unexplained money under provision of 69A of the Act. Undisputedly, the document was found and seized from the possession of the assessee but only on the standalone basis of such document which was not signed by the assessee and never acted upon by the assessee. The provision of section 69A of the Act cannot be pressed into service against the assessee. We m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and sustain the addition. If the AO was not satisfied with the version of the assessee, it was incumbent upon him to examine the seller of the property, and ascertain the facts regarding the actual sales consideration. In the absence of having carried out any such exercise, we are satisfied that a case has not been made out for making the addition. 34. In the similar manner coordinate bench of Delhi ITAT in the case of Saamag Developers (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT held that when the Assessing Officer has not made any independent enquiry from such persons and in the absence thereof no addition can be made. Especially when the Assessing Officer did not bring any adverse material on record or gave a finding with cogent evidence contrary to the explanation of the assessee and has not brought any independent corroborative material suggesting that the assessee has purchased such land/property and has made payment as recorded in the seize paper. In the present case also the Assessing Officer has made addition merely on the basis of so called agreement which has not been signed by the assessee and the A.O. has not brought on record any other positive or corroborative material to show that the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he order of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. DR also submitted that the document was found in possession of the assessee. The said document is signed in 2013 by the seller of the property along with the witness. Since the assessee has not submitted the details of the source of the said money so advanced the addition is rightly sustained by the ld. CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record. The only dispute raised by the assessee in this appeal is the addition of Rs. 5 lac made by the ld. AO and sustained by the ld. CIT(A). The brief facts related to the dispute is that the assessee filed her regular return of income u/s 139 of the Act on 03.02.2015 declaring a total income at Rs. 8,42,670/-. The residential premises of the assessee were subjected to search on account of the fact that the assessee is one of the member of the Jain Plywood House Group. In that search a copy of Ikrarnama dated 30.08.2013 between Shri Harinarayan Sharma (as a seller resident of Village -Balawala, Tehsil - Sanganer) and Smt. Kanta Devi Jain (as buyer) regarding sale of agricultural land at Balawala for Rs. 70 lacs per bigha was found and seized as Page no. 1-4 of Ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h held that :- "32. On careful consideration of rival submissions first of all from the relevant part of the assessment order, we observe that the A.O. in para 5 has reproduced some parts of agreement LP-1 pages no. 35-39. The A.O. at page 5 drew a table from the said agreement wherein the payment of Rs. 54,00,000/- has been shown at serial no.3 but no cheque/UTR no. has been mentioned against said amount. At the same time we observe that an amount of Rs. 50,000/- each has been shown to have been paid by the assessee through cheque no. 100095 and 100096 which has been admitted by the assessee before the A.O. with an explanation that it was token amount but thereafter the assessee changed his mind and came out from the deal of purchase of property. The said agreement was not signed by the assessee and the same was only signed by the builder, except this agreement there was no documentary evidence in the hands of A.O. in support of his claim that the assessee has paid of Rs. 54,00,000/- in cash out of his income from other undisclosed sources treating the same as unexplained money under provision of 69A of the Act. Undisputedly, the document was found and seized from the possession....