MOHAN LAL KHATNAWALIA,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AJMER

PDF · subscribers
ITA 854/JPR/2017Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 March 2019AY 2009-105 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition was made solely on the basis of a statement without providing an opportunity for cross-examination. The CIT(A) also passed an ex parte order without considering the merits. Therefore, the ex parte order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased a residential plot and the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 4,66,660/- on account of unexplained investment, treating it as on-money payment. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition on account of unexplained investment was justified without providing an opportunity for cross-examination and whether the CIT(A) order was valid if passed ex parte without considering merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69B,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMAvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 853/JP/2017

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Jain (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 20/03/2019Pronounced: 26/03/2019

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 853/JP/2017
ITA No. 854/JP/2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 853/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke Harjeet Kaur, I.T.O., Vs. W/o- sh. Sukhdev Singh, Ward 2(1), 114A, Baldev Nagar, Lane No. 2, Ajmer. Makarwali Road, Ajmer (Raj) 305001. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AARPK 7347 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 854/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke Mohan Lal Khatnawalia, I.T.O., Vs. E-106, Shastri Nagar, Ajmer Ward 2(2), (Raj), 305001. Ajmer. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AGIPK 7252 N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Sanjiv Jain (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms. Anuradha (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/03/2019 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 26/03/2019 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. ITA No. 853/JP/2017.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex parte order of ld.CIT(A), Ajmer dated 10/08/2017 for the A.Y. 2009-10 in the matter order passed U/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

ITA 853 & 854/JP/2017 2 Harjeet Kaur & Mohan Lal Khatanwalia Vs. ITO

2.

In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved for reopening of assessment and also for confirming the addition of Rs. 4,66,660/- on account of unexplained money/investment U/s 69B of the Act.

3.

Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. In this case, after reopening, the assessment on the basis of search conducted at the business premises of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 4,66,660/- U/s 69B of the Act on account of unexplained investment. In the order so passed, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has purchased a residential plot in "Revenue Residency "(Nizi Khatedar, Residential Scheme)at village peepla bahrat singh (Jaisinghpura, Muhana Road, Bhankrota, tehsil Sanganer, Jaipur) developed by Shri Madan Mohan Gupta in F.Y. 2008-09 relevant to A.Y. 2009-10. The name of the assessee Smt. Harjeet Kaur is appearing at S.

No. 56 in the seized register Annexure As (unique Account book) Exhibit-3 seized from the office of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta. Shri Madan Mohan Gupta has accepted and honoured on money receipt on sale of plots in Revenue Residency scheme which is Rs 2000/- per sq. Yds as per seized papers. Meaning thereby the assessee has paid on money of Rs. 466660/- to Shri Madan Mohan Gupta in F.Y. 2008-09 relevant to A.Y. 2009-10 to purchase plot no 56 in Revenue Residency Scheme at village Peepla Bharat Singh, Bhankrota, Tehsil Sanganer Jaipur. Accordingly the ITA 853 & 854/JP/2017 3 Harjeet Kaur & Mohan Lal Khatanwalia Vs. ITO Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee has paid on money on the plot so purchased by her.

4.

By passing the ex parte impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal.

5.

I have heard the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that only on the basis of statement of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta, addition was made without providing any opportunity to the cross examination. The Assessing Officer has not mentioned any incriminating document being found during the course of search at the premises of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta so as to indicate any on money received from the assessee. On the generalized statement, the Assessing Officer has made addition. The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by passing ex parte order and without giving any finding on merits of the addition. In the substantial interest of justice, I set aside the ex parte order of the ld. CIT(A) and the matter is restored back to him for deciding the issue afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

ITA 853 & 854/JP/2017 4 Harjeet Kaur & Mohan Lal Khatanwalia Vs. ITO 6. In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes only.

7.

Now I take ITA No. 854/JP/2017.

The facts and circumstances as well as the grounds taken by the assessee are same as raised in ITA No. 853/JP/2017. The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal after passing the ex parte order. Following the reasoning given in the order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issue afresh after giving due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within one month of receipt of this order.

8.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are allowed in part for statistical purposes only.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26th March, 2019

More judgments on Section 69B

All 1,579 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →