TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 361
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s 148 of the Act and subsequently completed the assessment by making addition of Rs. 29,62,107/- which is altogether on different grounds. 2. Ld. CIT[A], NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and on facts to upheld A.O.'s addition of Rs. 24,62,107/- on account of LTCG on rural agriculture land and that too, without considering valuation report of RVO w. r. t. cost of acquisition as on date 1/4/1981. 3. Ld. CIT[A], NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and on facts to upheld Jassessing officer's addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- ignoring the fact that assessee was having sufficient cash balance on account of previous cash withdrawals from her own bank account." 3. The additional grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, are as follows: "Ld. CIT[A], NFAC, Delhi and the Jassessing officer, has erred in law and on facts to reopen assessee's assessment u/s 147 and issued of notice u/s 148 of the Act and subsequently completed the assessment by making addition of Rs. 29,62,107/- which is altogether on different grounds." 4. Learned Counsel for the assessee stated that above ground is an additional ground raised as the ground no. I of appeal memo in Form 36. It was no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Rs. 24,71,792/-. The assessee has not shown the capital gain on such transaction to the Department. It was only when the department asked the assessee regarding the fixed deposits, the matter came up in the file. On perusal of the sale deed submitted by the assessee, it was noted by the assessing officer that the amounts of Rs. 24,71,792/-, have been received through cheque and the time deposits of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rs. 2,50,000/- + Rs. 2,50,000/-) have been made in cash. The source of the same remains unexplained. Therefore, the same was added to the total income of the assessee as unaccounted investment. 8. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee has submitted that the time deposits was made out of the sale proceeds of ancestral land at channod from which the assessee received a share of Rs. 24,71,792/-. The contention of the assessee was found to be incorrect by the assessing officer. However, the capital gain on such land was not disclosed by the assessee in her return of income. The assessee did not submit any valuation report nor did he worked out the capital gain on such sale of land. Therefore, an instance of sale was asked regarding sale of agricultural land at....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quiries with the office of the Sub-Registrar and he has collected the instances of sale of similar lands in the same village and has adopted such value as the value of the said lands as on 01-04-1981. The assessee has not brought on record any evidence to disprove the value adopted by the assessing officer. The valuation report submitted by the assessee does not have any clear reasoning to arrive at the value of Rs. 150 per sq.mt, whereas the assessing officer has adopted the said value based on actual sale of land in the same village. The assessee has not brought on record any material evidence to refute the value adopted by the assessing officer which is based on the actual sale value recorded by a Government Authority. The value recorded by such Government Authority cannot be simply brushed aside without the assessee bringing on record any material to demonstrate that the said value is incorrect. Therefore, the value adopted by the assessee by relying on the valuation report is not acceptable as the same is made without any proper reasoning or computation for arriving at the value of Rs. 150 per sq.mt. Further, the assessee has submitted that the said lands were agricultural lan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax treatment of above. Assessee vide her letter dated 07/02/2018 replied that she is an old lady and what so ever deposits are made as above are out of her and her husband's past savings. However, she did not furnish any details/evidences in support of her above claim. 4 Reply of the assessee has been perused. It is clear that she could not furnish satisfactory reply in connection with the above claim. The unsatisfactory reply of the assessee makes the undersigned to believe that the assessee is not in a position to explain that the sources of above investment and the interest income were not liable to be taxed during the year under consideration. 5. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case, the assessee has chosen not to file return of income for the year under consideration although the total income in form of deposits and interest income has exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to tax as discussed in paragraph 4 above and the assessee was assessable under the Act. 6. As the assessee neither filed her return of income for the year nor did she satisfactory reply regarding the above transactions, undersigned has reason to belie....