2019 (1) TMI 748 - AT - Income Tax

Long Term Capital Gain and on account of deposits in the bank account - Held that - Shri Mohan Dhingra, who was actual owner of the property, was also show caused regarding sale of this property and a copy of notice dated 09/01/2018 is placed the reply of Shri Mohan Dhingra is placed and the copy of return along with computation of income and copy of letter written by Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3) accepting the claim of Shri Mohan Dhingra that he had included the Long Term Capital Gain on the sale made through his power of attorney holder Shri Yogesh Malhotra, was rightly declared in his return of income. All these facts need factual verification. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to remit the issue back to the Assessing Officer who should pass a fresh assessment order after ascertaining the entire facts and circumstances. Other addition with respect to deposits in bank accounts is also remitted to the AO as it is also related to the sale made by the assessee as power of attorney holder. AO should co-relate the sale consideration and date of receipt of sale consideration and deposit in the relevant bank account and then withdrawals from this bank account to the real owner of the property. The assessee will be provided reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard. - Appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues: Appeal against CIT(A) order regarding Long Term Capital Gain and bank deposits for assessment year 2013-2014.

Long Term Capital Gain Issue:
The appeal was filed against the CIT(A) order for assessment year 2013-2014, primarily challenging the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of Long Term Capital Gain and bank deposits. The appellant, as a power of attorney holder, declared Long Term Capital Gain on the sale of land. However, it was argued that the original owner had already declared the income from the same property in his return of income. The appellant requested a remand to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, emphasizing that the income cannot be assessable in the hands of both parties. The Tribunal found merit in this argument and decided to remit the issue back to the Assessing Officer for factual verification and a fresh assessment order. It was noted that the Assessing Officer should thoroughly examine all facts and circumstances before making a decision on the Long Term Capital Gain issue.

Bank Deposits Issue:
Regarding the addition on account of deposits in the bank accounts, it was contended that the appellant received payments for the property sale in cash, deposited the amounts in bank accounts, and later transferred the funds to the actual owner of the property. The appellant argued that this addition was linked to the earlier Long Term Capital Gain addition since the proceeds were from the same property sale. Consequently, the appellant requested that this ground also be remanded to the Assessing Officer for further examination. The Tribunal agreed with this reasoning and remitted the bank deposits issue back to the Assessing Officer for correlation of the sale consideration, receipt dates, bank deposits, and subsequent withdrawals to the real owner of the property. The appellant was assured of a reasonable opportunity to present their case during this process.

Conclusion:
After hearing both parties and reviewing the material on record, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. The Tribunal decided to remit both the Long Term Capital Gain issue and the bank deposits issue back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment. The Stay Application was dismissed as it had become infructuous due to the decision on the appeal. The order was pronounced in the open court on 11/01/2019, emphasizing the need for a detailed re-evaluation by the Assessing Officer to address the complexities of the case thoroughly.