SUBHASH CHAND,MATHURA vs. I.T.O-1(3)($0, MATHURA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 158/AGR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Agra12 September 2023AY 2009-104 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal agreed that it would be inequitable to penalize the assessee if similar cases involving his brothers were dropped. Therefore, the issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment was completed ex-parte under sections 144/147 of the Act, with additions made towards deemed income from property purchase and household expenses. The assessee argued that no actual payment was made for the property, and similar proceedings against his brothers were dropped.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition on account of deemed income from property purchase was justified, especially when similar proceedings against co-owners were dropped. Also, whether household expenses were correctly added.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, ‘SMC’: AGRA

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Hearing: 13.09.2023Pronounced: 18.09.2023

ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM, This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Agra, dated 21.06.2018 pertaining to Assessment Year 2009-10.

2. The grounds of appeal reads as under:-

1. (a) Because, in the facts and circumstances of the case, learned 'CIT (Appeals)', Agra failed to appreciate that the notice dated 31.03.2016 issued under section 148 of the 'Act' in the case of 'appellant' was wholly illegal, invalid and without jurisdiction. (b) Because, there was no valid 'reason to believe regarding escapement of income with the 'AO' and the reasons were recorded without due application of mind. The reasons recorded were no more than 'reason to suspect'.

(c) Because, without prejudice to aforesaid, on due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made, learned 'CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that though the purchase deed mentioned payment of consideration, there were enough evidence on record that the 'appellant' did not make any payment in respect of sale deed executed by his father in favour and his two brothers and thereby in not deleting addition of Rs. 570,000 made by the ‘AO’. (d) Because, learned 'CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the similar proceedings initiated in the case of two brothers of 'appellant' by the Income tax Officer (1)(3), Mathura and the Income tax Officer 1(3)(5), Mathura in respect of same property were dropped by the respective assessing authority on finding that no consideration was paid for the purchase of property. (e) Because, learned 'CIT (Appeals) has erred in not deleting addition of Rs. 120,000 made by the 'AO' towards household expenses ignoring the fact that the 'appellant' was agriculturist and had no other source of income and he had to meet expense from agricultural activities only.

2.

Because, the order under appeal is wrong, illegal, bad in law and against the principles of natural justice.”

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has not complied with the notices of the Assessing Officer. Hence, the assessment was completed u/s 144/147 of the Act assessing the income at Rs.6,90,000/-. The assessed income for Rs.5,70,000/- is the assessee’s share of deemed income from purchase of an immovable property besides other income of Rs.1,20,000/-.

4.

Against the above order, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A).

The assessee pleaded that the assessee has not received notices. However, the ld. CIT(A) was not convinced. The assessee also submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that no money was actually exchanged in the immovable property registration. The sale deed was made between the assessee’s father and the assessee and his two brothers and he submitted that they being illiterate persons made the deed; however, no actual money was paid to the father. The Ld. CIT(A) was not convinced with the arguments of the ld. Counsel for the assessee and he confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.

5.

Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records.

6.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the case of two brothers of the assessee who were similarly said to have given the amount to the father for the property, the Revenue has given notice but later on dropped the case. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. Upon careful consideration, we agree with the proposition that the Assessing Officer may enquire about the position of the two brothers where notices are said to have been dropped. If that be so it will not be equitable that the assessee alone should be visited with the rigorous of deemed income. The Ld. DR did not have any objection to the above proposition. Hence, we remit this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall consider the issue afresh considering our observation hereinabove and after giving the assessee due opportunity of being heard.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18.09.2023.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →