Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member ITA No. 36/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year 2008-09
Shri Bhupendrabhai C. The DCIT, Patel , Canal Vibhag, International Octroi Naka, Petlad Road, Vs Taxation, Nadiad, Ahmedabad PAN: ACZPP5337L (Respondent) (Appellant)
Revenue by: Shri Jayant Jhaveri, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri Tej Shah, A.R. Date of hearing : 08-04-2019 Date of pronouncement : 24-04-2019 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
The assessee has filed this appeal on two issues against the decision of ld. CIT(A)-13, Ahmedabad in sustaining addition on account of unexplained investment of Rs. 3,48,700/- u/s. 69 of the act and also sustaining addition of Rs. 1,05,260/- in respect of agricultural income treating as unexplained income u/s. 69A of the act.
The fact in brief is that the assessing officer was having information that assessee has purchased shares of Tata Steel Pvt. Ltd. of Rs. 3,48,700/-
I.T.A No. 36/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 2 Shri Bhupendra C. Patel vs. DCIT
during F.Y. 2007-08 but the assessee had not filed return of income, therefore, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the act by issuing of notice 148 of the act on 27th March, 2015 to file return of income. In response, the assessee filed his return of income declaring nil income and agricultural income was shown at Rs. 1,05,260. Subsequently, the notice u/s. 143(2) of the act was issued on 11th August, 2015. During the assessment, the assessing officer has enquired about the source of investment made in the purchase of shares of Tata steel Ltd. for Rs. 3,48,700/-. The assessee claimed that he was not having any demant account, therefore, the assessing officer has treated the investment in shares as unexplained. The assessing officer has asked the assessee to furnish detail in respect of claim of agricultural income. However, the assessee has furnished copy of 7/12 showing land was purchased by his forefather. The asssessee has claimed that he has earned agricultural income on cultivation of paddy on the agricultural land, however, he has not produced other documents like bank statement etc. Therefore, the assessing officer has treated the agricultural income as unexplained u/s. 69 of the act and added to the total income of the assessee.
Aggrieved assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed both the ground of appeal of the assessee reiterating the reason on the basis of which the assessing officer has made aforesaid addition.
During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the ld. counsel has submitted paper book containing the document and details of submission
I.T.A No. 36/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 3 Shri Bhupendra C. Patel vs. DCIT
made during the course of appellate proceedings before CIT(A). He has contended that assessing officer has not considered that assessee was a non- resident Indian and he was not having taxable income exceeding the basic exemption limit. He has also submitted that the assessing officer has failed to appreciate the material fact that source of investment in the share of Tata Steel Ltd was out of agricultural income earned from the agricultural land. The ld. counsel has also contended that assessing officer has also not disproved the documentary evidences furnished during assessment in support of agricultural income earned by the assessee. On the other hand, ld. departmental representative has supported the order of ld. CIT(A).
We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record carefully. The assessing officer has made addition of Rs. 3,48,700/- being unexplained investment in the share of Tata Steel Ltd based on the AIR information. Further, the assessing officer has also made addition of Rs. 1,05,260 treating the claim of agricultural income earned by the asssessee unexplained for want of supporting evidences. The assessee has claimed that he is a non-resident Indian and he was not having taxable income exceeding the basic exemption limit, therefore, the return of income was not filed. The assessee has also explained that he has been staying in USA since last so many years. It is stated that assessee was having agricultural land which was cultivated by the cultivators on his behalf from which he has earned agricultural income. With the assistance of ld. representatives, we have gone through the paper book and material on record and it is noticed that vide submission dated 15th Feb, 2016 the assessee has furnished copies of 7/12 and 8A before the assessing officer. The assessee has also furnished
I.T.A No. 36/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 4 Shri Bhupendra C. Patel vs. DCIT
the certificate of Talati in form no. 7/12 demonstrating that agricultural crops i.e. paddy were cultivated on the land owned by the assesee as per page no. 13 to 31 of the paper book. The assessee has also placed copies of payments vouchers in support of earning of his agricultural income. After taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and material, we observe that the lower authorities have not given specific finding on the aforesaid material furnished by the asssessee in support of his claim that he has earned agriculture income. The assessing officer has not verified the claim of the assessee on earing agricultural income i.e. paddy which was cultivated by the cultivators on his behalf of the assessee on the agricultural land owned by the assessee as per the certificate issued by the Talati in form no. 7/12. It is also noticed that assessing officer has also not considered various payments vouchers furnished by the assessee in support of earning agricultural income etc. In the light of the above material fact, we consider it appropriate to restore this case to the file of assessing officer for deciding afresh after examination and verification of the detail/information placed in the paper book of the assessee. Therefore, the case is set aside to the file of assessing officer for deciding de-novo after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee .
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24-04-2019
Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A No. 36/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 Page No 5 Shri Bhupendra C. Patel vs. DCIT
Ahmedabad : Dated 24/04/2019 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद