SMT. RAMKALA,GURGAON vs. ITO, REWARI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5787/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 February 2017AY 2007-083 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the facts were similar to a previous case where a property was sold for a higher amount than stated, and the excess was deposited in the bank. Following that precedent, the Tribunal ordered the deletion of the addition.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) received information about a deposit of Rs. 13,50,000 in the assessee's bank account. Due to lack of proper notice and non-participation, the AO made an addition of this amount, which was upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO based on AIR information was justified, especially when the assessee did not participate in assessment proceedings due to lack of proper notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : SMC-I : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Singh, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms Bedobina Chaudhuri, Sr. DR
Hearing: 27.02.2017Pronounced: 28.02.2017

Assessment Year : 2007-08 Ramkala, Vs. ITO, C/o Mahavir Singh, Advocate, Ward-2, 1078, Sector-15, Part-2, Rewari. Gurgaon. PAN: CWUPK5922M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mahavir Singh, Advocate Department By : Ms Bedobina Chaudhuri, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27.02.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2017 ORDER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 21.04.2016 in relation to the assessment year 2007-08.

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the AO received some AIR information about the assessee depositing a sum of Rs.13,50,000/- in her bank account with Corporation Bank, Circular Road, Rewari. In the absence of any proper service of notice, and the consequential non-participation by the assessee in the assessment proceedings, the AO made addition of Rs.13,50,000/- u/s 144 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) affirmed the same. The assessee is aggrieved against such addition.

3.

I have heard the parties and perused the relevant material on record. It is noticed that this appeal is related to the appeal of Shri Ami Lal Yadav (ITA No.1896/Del/2016) which came up for consideration before the Tribunal. The assessee is one of the co-owners who transferred the property to Shri Kanwar Singh for a stated consideration of Rs.24.22 lac along with the assessee in the above case. The Tribunal noticed in that case that the property was, in fact, sold for Rs.92.03 lac and the amount was, accordingly, received, which was deposited in the bank account on the relevant dates. That is how, the tribunal vide its order dated 27.09.2016, deleted the addition made in the hands of that assessee. As the facts and circumstances of the instant appeal, being the other co-owner of the property, are mutatis mutandis similar, following the view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Ami Lal Yadav (supra), I order for the deletion of the addition.

4.

In the result, the appeal is allowed.

The order pronounced in the open court on 28 .02.2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →