ANUBHAV AGGARWAL,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA
आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT &
SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 1288/CHD/2019
Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2014-15
Anubhav Aggarwal,
#526-B, Aggar Nagar,
Ludhiana 141001
बनाम
Vs.
The ACIT,
Central Circle-1,
Ludhiana
èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAYPA9742K
अपीलाथȸ/Appellant
Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent
Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : None
राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
(Virtual)
सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing
:
06.02.2025
उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement
:
25.02.2025
आदेश/Order
Per Krinwant Sahay, AM :
Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 5.7.2019 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Jalandhar [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’].
2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
1288 -Chd-2019
Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana
That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO and Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in making incorrect addition of Rs. 78,21,00,000/- being gifts received from wife residing out of India being received through proper banking channel. 2. Non applicability of Section 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961 as assessee has provided Bank Statements and Foreign Inward Remittance Certificates for all the gifts received. 3. The contention of Ld. AO and Ld. CIT (Appeals) is wrong that the assessee has routed unaccounted funds generated by the flagship company M/s ARK Imports Private Limited and routed these funds from different bank accounts in the name of Anubhav Aggarwal and other group companies i.e. M/s Genex Polyfab Limited, M/s Genex Fincap Private Limited. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO and Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in making incorrect addition of Rs. 12,90,000/-on imagination ground that the assess received salary of Rs. 12,90,000/-from M/s ARK Imports Pvt. Ltd. And M/s Genex Industries Ltd. whereas the assesse has not drawn any salary during the current Financial Year and left India on 01.10.2013. 5. Ld. AO and Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in making incorrect addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- being cash received by M/s Genex Poly Lab Limited. 6. Ld. AO and Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in making incorrect addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- being amount received back from Sh. Amit Goel, brother in Law of Sh. Anubhav Aggarwal
1288 -Chd-2019
Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana
Ld. AO and Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in making incorrect addition of Arabian Emirates Dirham (AED) 1,13,50,000/- (which is convereted into INR Rs. 17,02,50,000/-) being property sold at Dubai by Ms. Svetlana Umarova, an NRI who is wife of Sh. Anubhav Aggarwal.
It emerges out from the record that ITA No. 1288/Chd/2017 and other cases of this group are on Board since 29th March 2017. From the Note Sheet entry, it is seen that Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Shri Jasleen Khera and others have appeared from time to time and thereafter all the Counsels have withdrawn their power of attorney and pleaded no instructions. On 26.9.2024, Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Sanjay Sood, CA also withdrew their power of attorney. It is pertinent to note that as and when a counsel withdrew his power of attorney, it is a duty cast upon him to serve a notice through registered post upon the Assessee informing that he is withdrawing his power of attorney so that Assessee can make alternative arrangement thereafter. The Tribunal is not required to serve a fresh notice. But in the interest of justice and for abundant caution, Tribunal issued fresh notice for hearing to the Assessee for 20.11.2024. But none appeared on behalf of the Assessee. It is 50th occasion that this group has been listed for hearing. The notice was 1288 -Chd-2019 Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana issued through the A.O. and the A.O. has informed that notice has been sent on the last e.mail available with the Department. It is further observed that DCIT, Central Circle, Ludhiana vide his letter dated 7.1.2025 informed the Tribunal that officials from the Range visited the premises of the Assessee which was found locked. 4. During proceedings before us, the ld. DR informed the Bench that he has been intimated by the Assessing Officer that the Assessee is absconding. We have been apprised that there are large number of cases pending against the head of the group with different investigating agencies. Looking to all these cumulative setting of circumstances would suggest that the Assessee is not very much interested in persecuting this appeal. Even otherwise, it is trite (‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’, 83 ITR 686 (Mad.)] and incumbent on the authority to decide an appeal on merit in accordance with the principles of natural justice. 5. Now coming on merits of the case, the brief facts, as enumerated in the assessment order are as under: 1. The assessee belongs to Genex Group of cases, Ludhiana where a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted on 1288 -Chd-2019 Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana
05.2013. During the search operation, various documents were found and seized from the various business and residential premises of the group. Accordingly, the case was centralized u/s 127 of Income Tax Act, 1961 vide order F.No.CIT- I/LDH/TECH/127/2013-14/606 dated 11.06.2013 and a notice u/s 153 A of the IT. Act requiring the assessee to file his return of income was issued on 24.03.2014. 1.2 In response thereto, no return of income was filed by the assessee on the ground that he is not having taxable income. The case was taken up for scrutiny and statutory notice u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire was issued on 13.05.2015 and the same was duly served on the assessee. Subsequently, notice u/s 142(1) issued and complied with. In response to these notices, Sh. Gaurav Gupta, C.A. and Sh. Gaurav Sharma, C.A., authorized representatives of the assessee attended the proceedings with whom the case was also discussed. 2. The assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income despite allowing of repeated opportunities. As per facts available on record, in the immediate preceding year, the assessee was having income by way of salary at Rs. 12,90,000/- being employed with M/s Genex Industries Ltd. & M/s ARK Imports Pvt. Ltd. As no return of it come
1288 -Chd-2019
Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana has been filed the salary of Rs. 12,90,000/- is being taken for taxation purposes on the basis of such receipt of income in the immediate preceding assessment year.
2.1 On examination of assessee's bank Account no.
7589 with United Bank of India, Clock Tower,
Ludhiana, Account no. 60041269875 with Bank of Maharashtra, Account no. 0-010721-164 with City
Bank , Account no. 129408361-006 with HSBC Bank
Ltd. and Account no. 0020N49778001 with Indusind
Bank, it is noticed that these bank accounts are credited with an amount of Rs. 78,21,00,000/- on different dates as per detail given in Annexure-A enclosed.
Period
Particulars
Amount (In Rs.)
2007-08
Mr. Roman Umaraov
57,43,057/-
2008-09
Mr. Roman Umaraov
66,36,11,825/-
2009-10
Mr. Roman Umaraov
1,62,65,892/-
2010-11
Mr. Roman Umaraov
20,27,66,730/-
2011-12
Mr. Roman Umarova
52,218/-
2012-13
Ms Swetlana Umarova
15,17,00,000/-
2013-14
Ms Swetlana Umaraov
78,21,00,000/-
Total
1,22,22,39,722/-
2 In the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to explain the source of deposit of Rs. 78,21,00,000/- on different dates throughout the year under consideration in the said bank account. The assessee as per his letter dated 07.03.2014 explained that these are gifts received during the year under consideration from his wife
1288 -Chd-2019
Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana
Ms. Svetlana Umarova and in support its contention enclosed the copies of the remittance advices.
2.3 In this connection it would not be placed to mention here that the assessee, during the period
01.04.2007 to 31.03.2014, received an amount of 1,22,22,39,722/- in the guise of gifts, as per detail given below:-
Period
Particulars
Amount (In Rs.)
2007-08
Mr. Roman Umaraov
57,43,057/-
2008-09
Mr. Roman Umaraov
66,36,11,825/-
2009-10
Mr. Roman Umaraov
1,62,65,892/-
2010-11
Mr. Roman Umaraov
20,27,66,730/-
2011-12
Mr. Roman Umarova
52,218/-
2012-13
Ms Swetlana Umarova
15,17,00,000/-
2013-14
Ms Swetlana Umaraov
78,21,00,000/-
Total
1,22,22,39,722/-
4 Since the amount received as gifts during the different periods was substantial say more than 122 Crores and are being received continuously on different dates nearly through out the year(s) and that to without any occasion, the genuineness of receipt of such gifts was required to be examined. Therefore, in order to verify the genuineness of the receipt of gifts as claimed, the assessee was asked to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions justifying the receipt of above amounts as gifts as claimed. He was also specifically asked to establish the relationship with the donee supported with documentary
1288 -Chd-2019
Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana evidence.
However, the assessee instead of establishing the genuineness of the receipt of above amounts as a gift and the relationship with the donee, filed his objections as per his letter dated
01.03.2016. 6. On other grounds of appeal i.e. ground Nos. 5,6 and 7, the ld. CIT(A) has given his findings as under:-
Ground No.5:
“I have gone the assessment order passed by the AO, submissions filed by the appellant and find that an addition of Rs. 10,00,000 has been made by the AO on account of genuine gift. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was found that appellant has deposited cash of Rs. 10 lakh with Genex Polyfab
Ltd. on 15.01.2014. The appellant was asked by the AO to furnish the sources of cash deposit made with M/s Genex Polyfab Ltd. and in the absence of any evidence being furnished, the same was held to be unexplained income.
Ground No. 6 :
I have gone through the assessment order passed by the AO, submissions filed by the appellant and find that an addition of Rs. 30,00,000 has been made by the AO on account of unexplained deposits/ credits in the bank account. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was found by the AO that there are certain credits in the bank account No. 7589 of the 1288 -Chd-2019
Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana appellant with United Bank of India, Ludhiana which could not be explained. In the absence of any explanation being given by the appellant, the total amount of deposits/credits amounting to Rs.
30,00,000 was held to be unexplained income for the year under consideration.
Ground No. 7 :
I have gone the assessment order passed by the AO, submissions filed by the appellant and find that an addition of Rs. 17,02,50,000 has been made by the AO on account of sale of property in Dubai. The AO has stated that as per the information available, it was found that appellant has sold a residential property on 14.04.2013 on power of attorney for AED
1,13,50,000 at Dubai. The property is villa No. 30,
FROND D, a residential villa with plot No. 345
measuring 622.37 sq. mtr. The appellant could not furnish any evidence at the stage of assessment and therefore, the total sale consideration of Rs.
17,02,50,000 was treated as unexplained income of the appellant.”
We have gone through the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and the appellate order passed by the ld. CIT(A). We find that the Assessing Officer has passed a speaking order based on various incriminating documents
1288 -Chd-2019
Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana found and seized from various business and residential premise of the group. Against the order of the Assessing
Officer, the Assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on different grounds. The ld. CIT(A), in our view, has passed a speaking order on merit on each and every issue / ground raised by the Assessee in the appeal. The Assessee dissatisfied with the order of the ld. CIT(A) has filed this appeal before the Tribunal but despite giving fifty opportunities to the Assessee, the Assessee has not complied with and further that all the Counsels and C.A. who had filed their Power of Attorney have also withdrawn in the absence of any instruction from the Assessee.
8. The ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(A) and prayed that the appeal of the Assessee deserves to be dismissed.
9. In our view, both the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) have passed the assessment order and the appellate order keeping in view the aspect of natural justice. They have considered all the necessary documents, statements and submissions filed by the Assessee. Since the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is a speaking order on each issue, therefore, in our considered opinion, there is no need to interfere in the 1288 -Chd-2019
Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana findings given by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the findings given by the ld. CIT(A) on different issues in the Appeal Order are hereby sustained / confirmed. Accordingly, appeal filed by the Assessee on different grounds are hereby dismissed.
10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced on 25.02.2025. ( RAJPAL YADAV )
Accountant Member
“आर.के.”
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant
2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent
3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT
4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT,
CHANDIGARH
5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार/