SH. MAAN SINGH,MEERUT vs. ITO, BARAUT

The assessee is aggrieved against addition of Rs.8,68,040/-.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a sum of Rs.12,50,000/- was deposited by the assessee in his saving bank account jointly maintained with his wife, Smt. Savitri Devi. On being called upon to explain the source of such cash deposit, the assessee stated that this amount was received on sale of agricultural land on 12.12.2007, which was deposited in saving bank account. On going through the Sale deed, it was found by the Assessing Officer that the land was sold only for a sum of Rs.3,81,964/-. Excess amount of Rs.8,68,036/- (Rs.12,50,000/- (-) Rs.3,81,964/-) was treated as unexplained. The Assessing Officer made addition for this amount, which came to be echoed in the first appeal.

I have heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record. There is no merit in the contention of the ld. AR that 50% of the amount deposited should be considered in his hands and the remaining 50% in the hands of his wife. It is so for the reason that the property sold was in the exclusive name of the assessee and there is a deposit of Rs.12,50,000/- in the bank account which coincides with the date of sale of the property. As such, the contention of the ld. AR for treating 50% of the amount deposited in the bank as pertaining to his wife, cannot be accepted.

Coming to the merits of the addition, it is seen that the assessee made sale of property claimed as agricultural land. The ld. AR admitted that the property was, in fact, sold for a sum of Rs.12,50,000/- but the sale deed was executed only for a sum of Rs.3,81,964/-. A copy of the bank account is available on page 26 of the paper book. It can be seen that there is a single deposit of Rs.12,50,000/- on 12.12.2007 and the date of sale deed is also the same i.e., 12.12.2007. This proves the assessee’s contention that a sum of Rs.12,50,000/- received from the sale of the property was deposited in the bank account.

The ld. AR contended that the land sold by the assessee is an agricultural land and no capital gain is chargeable on its transfer. Since the necessary facts in this regard are not available on record, I consider it expedient to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining the assessee’s contention about the sale of property, being, an agricultural land and not attracting any tax under the head `Capital gains.’ If the assessee’s contention about the sale of property, being, an agricultural land is proved, then no addition should be made. In the otherwise scenario, the matter be decided as per law by treating full value of consideration at Rs.12.50 lac.

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.