Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee deposited Rs. 60 lacs in a savings bank account on 29.04.2010, which the AO added to his income through an ex-parte order. The assessee contended that the amount represented proceeds from the sale of agricultural land via a General Power of Attorney, but the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition without considering the assessee's contentions or documentary evidence.
Held
The Tribunal found a prima facie plausible case for the assessee given the sale of land. As the relevant documents were not filed before the AO or considered by the ld. CIT(A), the Tribunal set aside both lower orders and restored the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee is at liberty to submit details, and the ld. AO is directed to verify the veracity of the Sale Deeds.
Key Issues
Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 60 lacs without considering the assessee's explanation and documentary evidence of agricultural land sale, and whether the matter requires remand to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after verification of evidence.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 09.12.2024 passed for assessment year 2011- 12. 2. The grievance of the assessee is that ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.60 lacs. A.Y.2011-12 2
The brief facts of the case are that a sum of Rs.60 lacs was deposited in the Saving Bank Account of the assessee on 29.04.2010. The AO sought the explanation of the assessee for said deposit. He passed ex-parte order and made addition of Rs.60 lacs to the income of the assessee.
Before ld. CIT (Appeals), it was contended by the assessee that he is a senior citizen aged 76 years. He was owner of agricultural land measuring 2 kanal in village Bhabat. This was sold for a sum of Rs.60 lacs. Though Sale Deed was not executed but Agreement to Sell was executed. The assessee has executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of Shri Dharam Singh S/o Gurcharan Singh and Shri Ram Krishan, resident of Village Bapat.
These two persons have divided this land into smaller plots of 3 marla 4 marla and sold them by virtue of General Power of Attorney available in their favour. In other words,, they were representing the assessee as vendor by virtue of General Power of Attorney.
Copies of all these Sale Deeds and other details were filed before the CIT (Appeals) but ld. CIT (Appeals) did not deal with any of the issues, rather confirmed the additions without touching any of the contentions of the assessee. It is totally a non- A.Y.2011-12 3 speaking order. The appeal was instituted on 08.01.2019 and it has been decided on 09.12.2024. The dispute remains as it is.
Before us, assessee has filed a Paper Book running into 269 pages and permission to place additional evidence on record. After going through the details submitted by the assessee, prima-facie we find a plausible case in favour of the assessee because land was sold by the assessee but these documents were not filed before the AO nor considered by the CIT (Appeals), therefore, for cross- examination, issues are required to be relegated to the AO.
Accordingly, we set aside both the orders and restore the issue to the file of AO. The assessee will be at liberty to submit these details before the AO and we direct that the ld. AO shall verify the veracity of these Sale Deeds and thereafter adjudicate the issue.
The source of deposit represents the sale proceeds. Accordingly, we allow this appeal for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.