9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 390X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... repancies pointed - but the appellant did not produce the said land owners and to meet with the various points. Validity of transaction - Purchase and sale of shares is available but no details of opening and closing stock given. No details given as to shares of which company have been purchased or sold - Without such details, one cannot ascertain the quantum of profit or loss - appellant was not able to prove from reliable evidence as to deposit of amount in cash in the bank of the amount and investing/trading in shares despite of several opportunities provided to him – appeal decided against the assesse. - - - - - Dated:- 24-1-2013 - NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND JAINENDRA KUMAR RANKA, JJ. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by Jainendra Kumar Ranka J.-Mr. Sharvan Kumar Gupta on behalf of Mr. Ankur Rastogi, for the appellant. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant herein for the assessment year 1994-95 assailing the order passed by the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short, "the ITAT"), which, vide order dated July 30, 2010, dismissed the appeal of the appellant. The appellant is a private limited company and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 which was deposited in cash in bank as the nature and source of such deposit was not substantiated. Further, he made addition on account of dealing in shares as apparent sources were not proved. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Assessing Officer, an appeal was preferred before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (in short, "the CIT(A)"), Before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the appellant produced some more material in the shape of receipts from Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti ; some affidavits and other materials. Since some of the evidence were not provided at the lower stage and were produced, first time before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), therefore, in the interest of justice, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. It was reported by the Assessing Officer in the remand report that (1) various lands situated in different areas of Nohar Tehsil were taken on lease for the period of one year starting from January 1, 1993, to January 1, 1994, and all the lease agree-ments are. written in the same handwriting or typed, witnessed and signed on the same date ; (2) the stamp papers were pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ultivation three-fourth of the agricultural produce will go to the appellant and the balance one-fourth will be given to the owner of the land. Forgetting about the abovementioned defects, it is very strange that the agreement is for a period when sowing is not done in Rajasthan. The two cultivation seasons in Rajasthan are June/July and October/ November. In certain parts of Rajasthan where irrigation facilities are available, the third crop is taken in the month of March/April also. Sowing season of mustard (sarson) is October/November and of igrandi it is June/July. These are the main crops sold as per the Krishi Mandi's receipts. Mustard will be ready to sale in February/March and Erandi will be ready to sale only in October/November. Thus, it is not possible that the land taken on 1st of January will be utilized for agricultural purpose. The receipts from the Krishi Upaj Mandi are mainly in respect of arandi, sarsoon and taramira and receipts are dated April, 1993. It means the land taken for cultivation in the month of January, 1993, whereas the crop was sold in first week of April, 1993, which is just not possible. In some of the cases agreement for the period starting fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l of the various opportunities and also failed to give reply to the notice under section 142(1). The assessee filed some additional evidence and such evidence were not found genuine. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has observed that the lease agreement from January, 1993, while agricultural receipts are in the month of April, 1993. No sowing is done in April, 1993. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has evaluated the evidence on the basis of human probability and surrounding circumstances. The conclusion drawn by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot be termed as incorrect. We, therefore, feel that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has rightly upheld the addition of Rs. 12,81,000. Hence, grounds of appeals Nos. 1 and 2 are dismissed." With reference to the claim of investment in shares, the learned Incometax Appellate Tribunal held as under : "We have heard both the parties. Purchase and sale of shares is available but no details of opening and closing stock given. No details given as to shares of which company have been purchased or sold. Without such details, one cannot ascertain the quantum of profit or loss. Si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
