2018 (1) TMI 755 - AT - Income Tax

Addition of unexplained income from undisclosed sources - Held that - AO after having satisfied himself about the source of deposits as having been sourced from the advance received for sale of a specific agricultural land sold by the assessee, cannot thereafter have any grievance against the order passed which has relied upon his own Remand Report. Consequently, the occasion to file an appeal against the consequential relief does not arise. It is noted that the evidence relied upon has not been rebutted. The assessee in the facts of the present case, admittedly has pleaded that he only has agricultural income which has been accepted by the AO also as per page one of his order. - Decided against revenue

Issues:
1. Addition of unexplained income from undisclosed sources.
2. Validity of sale agreement of land as proof of cash deposits.
3. Admissibility of additional evidence in the form of documents.
4. Relief granted by CIT(A) based on remand report.
5. Justification of cash deposits by the appellant.
6. Dismissal of departmental appeal.
7. Refraining from imposing costs by ITAT.
8. Filing of frivolous appeals by the Revenue.

Analysis:
1. The Revenue contested the deletion of an addition of ?45,00,000 as unexplained income from undisclosed sources by the CIT(A). The AO had made the addition due to lack of proof regarding cash deposits in the bank account. However, the CIT(A) admitted fresh evidence, including a sale agreement of land, and remanded the case to the AO. The AO, after verifying the evidence, agreed that the cash deposits were an advance payment for the sale of specific agricultural land. The CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee based on this finding, which was upheld in the present proceedings.

2. The Revenue challenged the validity of admitting the sale agreement of land as proof of cash deposits instead of the registered deed of sale. The appellant justified the cash deposits by providing details of the sale agreement and subsequent transactions through RTGS. The AO, in the remand report, verified and agreed with the appellant's contention that the cash deposits were advance payment for the sale of agricultural land. The CIT(A) accepted this explanation, leading to the deletion of the addition made by the AO.

3. The Revenue raised concerns about the admissibility of additional evidence, including the sale agreement of land, registries, and bank statements. The AO initially made the addition based on lack of evidence from the appellant. However, the CIT(A) allowed the submission of fresh evidence during the appellate proceedings, which played a crucial role in establishing the source of cash deposits as advance payment for the sale of specific agricultural land.

4. The relief granted by the CIT(A) to the assessee, based on the remand report and additional evidence, was a key point of contention. The AO, after considering the facts and evidence presented by the appellant, acknowledged that the cash deposits were related to the advance payment for the sale of agricultural land. The CIT(A) upheld this position, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.

5. The appellant successfully justified the cash deposits by providing detailed information about the sale agreement, subsequent transactions, and the source of funds. The AO, in the remand report, verified the appellant's contentions and agreed that the cash deposits were advance payment for the sale of agricultural land. The CIT(A) accepted this explanation, leading to the deletion of the addition made by the AO.

6. The ITAT dismissed the departmental appeal, upholding the findings of the CIT(A) based on the evidence and reasoning presented by the appellant. The ITAT found no merit in the Revenue's appeal, considering the facts and submissions that remained unrebutted on record.

7. The ITAT refrained from imposing costs despite having the power to do so. However, the ITAT expressed concerns about the filing of frivolous appeals by the Revenue without proper consideration of the facts and evidence presented. The ITAT emphasized the need for fair and judicious exercise of discretion by tax officials to avoid eroding trust in the tax administration system.

8. The ITAT criticized the filing of frivolous appeals by the Revenue, highlighting the negative impact on taxpayer trust and the efficiency of the tax administration. The ITAT emphasized the importance of avoiding mindless adherence to targets and urged for a more positive and trust-building approach in handling appeals to maintain the integrity of the tax system.

← Previous Next →