TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1920
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y, wrongly, arbitrarily and without any basis sustained addition of Rs. 49,82,000/- to the returned income of the assessee. 5. Any other ground which may be taken up at the time of hearing of appeal with the kind permission. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that in the present case the assessee had not filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13. Thereafter, after recording reasons notice under section 148 was issued on 15/05/2015 to the assessee and assessee was asked to file his return of income within one month of issue of notice. The assessee neither responded to this notice nor filed his return of income and violated the provision of Income Tax. Therefore penalty proceedings under section 271F of the Act were initiated. Subsequently, the notice under section 142(1) dt. 20/06/2016 alongwith Questionnaire were issued and assessee was sought to furnish the source of cash deposit, but no reply was filed by the Assessee on the given date, and hence, being time baring matter, a show cause notice u/s 144 dated 07.10.2016 was issued. In response, the reply received on 22 10.2016 submitting the copy of sale deed. It is found that the assessee has sold an agricultur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the impugned order and allow the part relief to the assessee by stating as under: 7. The contentions of the A.O. and the appellant have been carefully considered. The above two Remand Reports comprehensively counter all the contentions raised by the appellant. 7.1 Regarding the appellant's claim that benefit of Rs. 20 lakhs was not given, both the A.Os. as per the Remand Report dated 09.05.2019 and 10.02.2020 have confirmed independently that the said amount of Rs. 20 lakhs was received and deposited by the appellant in the previous A.Y. 2011-12 and was altogether a different transaction which had been accounted for in the previous A.Y. 2011-12. Therefore, there is no question of giving any relief in the present appeal for A.Y. 2012-13. 7.2 Regarding the benefit of Rs. 15 lakhs, the appellant has claimed that it had received an amount of Rs. 10 lakhs from Shri Jagpal Singh and Rs. 5 lakhs from Shri Azaib Singh as cash advance for the sale of land, which was subsequently cancelled and the total cash receipt of Rs. 15 lakhs was subsequently returned. However, the appellant could" not produce Shri Jagpal Singh before the A.O. at the time of passing of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 46A of the Income Tax Act, 1961- Appeal No. 189/PKL/16-17 in the case of Sh. Pardeep Kumar, H.No. 512, Village Ghatiwala, Pinjore, Distt. Panchkula for the A.Yr. 2012-13 -regarding- Kindly refer your office letter F. No. CIT(A)/PKL/18-19/2678 dated 08.03.2019 on the subject cited above. 2. In this regard, it is submitted that the facts of the case in brief are that as per information available with this office, the assessment y/s 143(3)/147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was completed on 31.12.2016 by making addition of Rs. 42,20,000/-. Later on, it came to notice that while making addition of Rs. 42,20,000/-, after considering the benefit of Rs. 11,70,000/- out of previous withdrawals, the then AO had made addition of Rs. 42,20,000/- instead of Rs. 54,24,500/- (65,74,500(-)11,70,000). However, perusal of the records and copies of bank statement filed by the assessee, there is a total cash deposit of Rs. 63,24,500/- and not Rs. 65,74,500/-. Hence, after considering the total cash deposit of Rs. 63,24,500/-and after allowing the benefit of Rs. 11,70,000/- as mentioned in the assessment order, addition of Rs. 52,54,500/- (63,24,500(-) 11,70,000/- was made and recti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x (Appeals) as per material available on records. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (lagvir Singh) Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Panchkula In compliance to the above said query letter, the assessee has produced Sh. Azaib Singh only whose statement was recorded who has claimed that he had paid Rs. 5,00,000/- as advance to Sh. Pardeep Kumar but he has not produced Sh. Jagpal Singh on the plea that he is not in a position of come in the office being Kidney Injury who has claimed that he had paid Rs. 10,00,000/- as advance to Sh. Pardeep Kumar. In support of his claim assessee has also filed copy of agreement. Further to cross examine the copy of agreement produced before the undersigned and a copy of the same was also filed with your office, information u/s 133(6) was also called for from the stamp vendor, which are reproduced as under :- To Sh. Sushil Kumar, Stamp Vender, Raipur Rani Tehsil, Distt. Panchkula D/Sir, Sub:- Information u/s 133(6) of the I.T.Act, 1961 in the case of Sh. Pardeep Kumar, Village Ghatiwala, Kalka - Asstt. Year 2012-13- Matter Regarding- Please refer to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Jagpal Singh. 5. Keeping in view of the above remarks, the additional evidence filed by the assessee during appellate proceedings, the additional grounds taken by the assessee are deserve to be rejected and the addition to the extent of cash deposited at Rs. 14,50,000/- is required to be confirmed out of the total addition made by the AO. 6. Regarding the issue of claim of cash deposited of Rs. 35 lacs on 02.06.2011 in saving bank account out of the advance cash received of Rs. 31,70,000/- from Sh.Ranjt Singh S/o Sh. Piara Singh, Pinjore and Kumar Shruti Singla as per sale deed dated 06.06.2011 it is submitted that out of the total advance received of Rs. 31,70,000/- Rs. 20,00,000/- has been deposited by the assessee in the previous year and claim of balance of amount of Rs 11,70,0001-was allowable. Accordingly, the assessee had deposited unaccounted cash of Rs. 23,30,000/-(35,00,000 (-) 11,70,000) from undisclosed sources which is required to be confirmed out of the total addition made by the AO. 7. Regarding the issue of claim of cash deposited of Rs. 05 lacs on 03.06.2011 in saving bank account out of the advance cash received of Rs. 31,70,000/- from S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ged with the earlier appeal filed by the assessee as intimated by the assessee. Later on, the case was remanded back by the Ld. CIT(A) to the undersigned for furnishing remand report after considering the documents filed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), Panchkula. The remand report was submitted, but the assessee filed objection on the same and Ld. CIT(A) again send the additional evidences submitted by the assessee for re-submission of the Remand Report. The report is being re-submitted as under as desired:- The assessee has submitted as under: In the rectified assessment order, the Ld. Assessing officer has made error in calculating the amount of addition. Relevant extract of the order is " Hence, after considering the total cash deposit of Rs. 63,24,500/- and after allowing the benefit of Rs. 11,70,000/- as mentioned in the assessment order, addition of Rs. 52,54,000/- (63,24,500 (-) 11,70,000/- ) is made and rectified accordingly." Your Goodself will appreciate the fact that 63,24,500/- - 11,70,000/-is Rs. 51,54,500/- not Rs. 52,54,000/-, Hence being a calculation error we request your Goodself to give benefit of Rs. 1,00,000/- and delete the ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee has submitted following reply on this point- In this regard, it is submitted that Rs. 15,00,000/- was received by the assessee as advance money (boyana) from Sh. Ajaib Singh and Jagpal Singh. This money was received in the year under consideration and returned back in the same year i.e. year under consideration. Your Goodself will appreciate the fact that money received and given back cannot be considered as income and is not taxable. To justify our claim we submit following documents:- Copy of Agreement for sale of land is annexed as Annexure 2. Copy of Cancellation of sale of agreement is annexed as Annexure 3. In this regard, summon u/s131 of the IT Act was issued to Sh.Jagpal Singh S/o SH. Jati Ram, VillageChownki. Panchkula on 20.01.2020 with the directions to appear before the undersigned on 27.01.2020. In response to that the assessee filed a reply on 03-02.2020 stating that he is suffering from various major and multiple disease as Acuter Kidney injury, Liver Problem. Hernia, Arthritics/Osteoarthritis right knee etc from last two year and not able to move here and there. Further, he has filed an affidavit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and report the assessing officer has not given any reason/justification for not considering the opening cash in hand of the assessee. Copy of capital account is annexed as Annexure 5 The assessee has submitted capital account and the claim of the assessee is found to be genuine as closing balance of cash in hand of last year is verified from the by Assessment file for the previous year i. e. 10-11 for which the assessment has been completed by this office. f. Benefit of Cash Withdrawal not given:- assessee has submitted Cash Flow Statement, during the year total withdrawal from the bank is Rs. 15,900-00. Assessee has also submitted the summary of cash deposited. The Ld. CIT(A) may take the decision as per merit of the case. report is being submitted for kind consideration of the Ld. CIT(Appeal)." 7. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on the record. * Issue pertaining to Rs. 20,00,000/- 8.1 In this regard Ld. CIT(A) in the order was given the reason for rejecting the contention of the assessee, was that the benefit of a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in the submissions as under:- On the Instructions given by your Goodself, the Ld. Assessing Officer has served following Letter dated 13.03.2019 to the assessee:- As per instructions given by the Ld. Assessing Officer the assessee produced Sh. Jagpal Singh and submitted all the desired Documents which are also verified through original documents as well. After the submitting of documents, no other information or document is demanded by the Ld. Assessing officer. The Ld. Assessing officer has also never ever called the assessee in person at any time while making remand report. The Ld. Assessing officer has made following observation in remand report and we will rebut the same as under:- Observation No. 1 of the remand report "in compliance to the above said query letter, the assessee has produced Sh. Azaib Singh only whose statement was recorded who has claimed that he has paid Rs. 5,00,000/- as advance to Sh. Pardeep Kumar but he has not produced Sh. Jagpal Singh on the plea that he is not in position to come in the office being Kidney injury who has claimed that he has paid Rs. 10,00,000/- as advance to Sh. Pardeep Kumar. In ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ance with law 8.4 We have heard the rival contention and perused the material available on the record. In the present case the Ld. CIT(A) has brought on record copy of agreement filed by the assessee, in the said agreement assessee has claimed that the agreement was entered between the assessee and Sh. Azaib Singh / Jagpal Singh on 10.04.2011 whereas the date of sale of the stamp paper is 27.05.2011. Based on the aforementioned agreement, the Ld. CIT(A) concluded that the agreement entered into between the assessee and the other parties was a sham agreement as it was beyond the preponderance of probabilities for the parties to have acted in such a manner, given the earlier circumstances and the subsequent purchase of the stamp paper. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) noted that the assessee had failed to produce Shri Jagpal Singhl, who allegedly gave Rs. 10 lakhs to the assessee, on the plea that he was unwell. We find no reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) regarding the disallowance of the payment of Rs. 10 lakhs, allegedly made by Sh. Jagpal Singh and the addition is confirmed . However we found that besides the amount of Rs. 10 lakhs, another amount of R....