Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
The appeal filed by assessee is against order of CIT(A)-2, Noida dated 28.03.2018 relating to assessment year 2009-10 against order passed under section 147/144 of the Income T ax Act, 1961.
3HW-T arfto 4. / ITA No:- 4027/Del/2018
The assessee has raised the following grounds which read as under:-
That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and under the law in not quashing the impugned ex-parte assessment order dated 14/12/201/6 passed u/s 147/144 of IT. Act as it is bad in law inter alia because:
a) There is no proper and walid service o f notices u/s 148 o f IT . Act dated 18/03 21/03/2016. b) There is no proper and valid service o f notices u/s 142(1) o f I.T. Act dated 16/05/2016, 29/08/2016 and 12/09/2016. c) There is no proper and valid service of show cause notice u/s 144 o f I.T. Act dated 07/11/2016. d) Provisions o f sections 147/148 of IT. Act in terms have no application to the facts of Appellant’s case. e) Proper approval/sanction u/s 151 of I.T. Act for issuing notice u/s 148 had not been taken by the AO. f) Assessment order dated 02/12/2016 u/s 144/147 in Assessee’s own case for the year under consideration had already been passed by ITO, Ward 3(2), Bulandshahr", 2. That the authorities below have erred on facts and under the law in making/confirming addition o f Rs.2,26,00,000/- on account o f unexplained investment (cash deposit) in Appellant’s bank account u/s 69 of Income-tax Act, 1961.
The learned DR for the Revenue moved an adjournment application on the ground that the assessee had challenged the non service of notices.
The learned AR for the assessee pointed out that ground of appeal no. 1 is not pressed hence the same adjournment application moved by the learned AR is rejected and we proceed to decide the appeal.
The ground of appeal no. 1 raised by the assessee is not pressed and the same is dismissed as not pressed.
The only other issue raised is vide ground of appeal no. 2 against addition of Rs. 2,26,00,000/-. Briefly in the facts of the case, the assessee is. an agriculturist a.nd4h:€-««sesseems“arrm:grieulTurist- and a non filer of return
3 iR W 3ftflpr 4 . / ITA No:- 4027/Del/2018 of income. AIR information was received by the AO that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 2,26,00,000/- in the saving bank account maintained with Andhra bank. The AO recorded reasons of reopening the assessment and notice under section *148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. There was no compliance to the said notice. Further notices were issued under section 142(1) of the Act which remained uncomplied with. The AO thus completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act and made an addition of Rs. 2,26,00,000/-.
Before the CIT(A), the assessee explained that he was Grandson of Shri. Pitam Singh S/o Kudey Singh,, who had sold his agricultural land. A sum of Rs. 9.35 Crs was received by him on 27.05.2008 which was credited to his Saving account maintained with Andhra bank, Saving A/c no. 10509.
Shri. Pitam Singh had two sons i.e. Shri. Ramesh Chand and Shri. Vijay Pal. The saving account were maintained by Shri. Pitam Singh but no cheque book was issued to him. Hence withdrawal slips were used to withdraw the amount. It was further explained that Shri. Pitam Singh had infact used his thumb impression to make the withdrawal. Ramesh Chand had two Sons i.e. Shri. Kamarjeet and Shri. Inderjeet. The amount of Rs. 4.50 Crs which was to be received by Shri. Ramesh Chand was distributed equally between his two Sons i.e. Shri. Kamar Jeet and Shri. Inderjeet on 26.06.2008 only. Further a sum of Rs. 4.50 Crores was deposited in the account of Vijay Pal. The assessee claimed that the said amount was not taxable being the money received from grandfather. The assessee furnished 3
7T. / ITA No:- 4027/Del/2018 additional evidence before the CIT(A). The AO filed remand report against the same. However, the CIT(A) upheld the addition, against which the assessee is in appeal before us.
The learned AR for the assessee pointed out that the bank account out of which the said amount was withdrawn was the joint account between Shri. Pitam Singh and the assessee. Our attention was drawn to the copy of withdrawal form of Andhra bank placed at page 49 of the paper book. The learned AR for the assessee pointed out that Rs. 9 Cr was withdrawn under thumb impression of Shri. Pitam Singh and the signature of assessee Shri.
Kamar Jeet. He further pointed out that infact no cash was withdrawn and it was only the transfer of entries under which sum of Rs. 2,25,00,000/- was transferred to the account of Shri. Inderjeet with Andhra bank on 26.6.2008, Rs. 2,25,00,000/- in the account of Shri. Kamar Jeet and sum of Rs. 4,50,00,000/- in the account of Vijay Pal. He stressed that no cheque book was issued to a/c holders, hence the said entries. With regard to the balance deposit of Rs. 1 Lac in the account of the assessee, the learned AR for the assessee stated that the said deposit was out of earlier withdrawals made from the said account itself.
The learned DR for the Revenue placed reliance on the orders of the' authorities below.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The issue which arises in the present appeal is against addition of Rs."
KKP3R 3TlfroT 4. / ITA'No:- 4027/Del/2018
2,25,00,000/- deposited in the bank account of the assessee on 26.6.2008 and Rs. 1 Lac thereafter. The assessee explained that his grandfather Shri.
Pitam Singh had received Rs. 9.35 Crs on sale of agricultural land and the said amount was distributed amongst his sons / grandsons. The amount was not transferred through cheque entries but was transferred through transfer entries of the saving account with Andhra bank. We have perused the evidences filed in this regard and find even the so called withdrawals of Rs. 9 Crs was made under the signature of assessee alongwith the thumb impression of Shri. Pitam Singh. The bank account is maintained in join! names of Shri. Pitam Singh and Shri. Kamar Jeet. The said amount is then transferred to different persons i.e. Rs. 2,25,00,000/- to Shri. Inderjeet and Rs. 4.50 Crs to Shri. Vijay Pal and Rs. 2,25,00,000/- to assessee. In the entirety of above said facts and circumstances where the assessee has explained the source of the entries in his bank account, there is no merit in making the aforesaid addition in the facts of the case. The balance sum of Rs. 1 Lac deposited in the bank account of the assessee was out of withdrawals made on earlier date, during the year itself. Accordingly, we hold where the assessee has explained the source of deposits in his bank accounts, there is no merit in making the aforesaid addition of Rs. 2,26,00,000/-. The same is thus deleted. It may also be pointed out that out of the said amount the assessee had further made investments and purchased of land; once the source of the deposit stands explained, then the utilization of the said amount also stand explained.
3TRRR anftoT / ITA No:- 4027/Del/2018
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court onc\0 day of March, 2020.