9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 813X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that other expenses on account of stamp duty and Registrar fees was shared 50:50 by her along with co purchaser Smt. Swati Paliwal - As regards the source, the assessee has duly explained that she had taken a loan of Rs. 1 crore from her husband Sh. Mahender Pal Paliwal by transfer from his account - The original source of money in the hands of the family of the assessee as well as Smt. Swati Paliwal was amount received as compensation on account of acquisition of land by the Government - CIT(A) rightly held that the assessee has submitted all the necessary documents to establish the genuineness and veracity of the source of investment – Decided against Revenue. Claim of agricultural income – Agricultural income treated as income from other sources - Held that:- CIT(A) has noted that assessee has submitted a copy of ownership of agricultural land and earning of agricultural income. - The assessee submitted that she has been earning agricultural income regularly and she had also declared the same in the Asstt. year 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 which has been accepted by the Department - CIT(A) has held that the AO has made a mistake by assessing an agricultural income declare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Appellate Authority which were never submitted before the AO during assessment proceedings. 3. In deleting the addition of Rs. 2,16,60,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained investment in property, violating the Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules as the additional evidence were filed by the assessee before the Appellate Authority which were never submitted before the AO during the assessment proceedings. 4. In directing the AO to treat the income of Rs. 1,00,000/- as agriculture income, violating the Rule 46A of the I.T. as the additional evidence were filed by the assessee before the Appellate Authority which were never submitted before the AO during assessment proceedings. 5. In accepting the sweeping submissions of the assessee which does not stand supported by evidence on record of the AO and in accepting self serving documents not corroborated or examined during assessment proceedings the thus denying opportunity of holistic examination to the AO, during the assessment proceedings. 6. Set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the AO to reexamine fresh evidence in a holistic manner. 3. Against the above order, the assessee appealed be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) noted that despite seeking time of almost three months for the preparation of the Remand Report, the Ld. AO did not comment on the merits of the additional evidence at all. 7. In light of the above discussion, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has correctly accepted the additional evidences. It cannot be said that Ld. AO was denied any opportunity to go through the additional evidences. Ld. AO has asked three months time, for submission of the Remand Report, Ld. CIT(A) has duly given the time. Thereafter, the ld. AO did not analyze the additional evidences properly. Thereafter, Ld. CIT(A) evaluated the additional evidences and gave a very cogent and speaking order on all issues concerned. In these circumstances, we find that the allegation by the Revenue that Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition in violation of Rule 46A is devoid of cogency. Under the circumstances, we hold that Ld. AO has been given proper opportunity by the Ld. CIT(A) to examine the additional evidence. Hence, Ld. CIT(A) s order on this account cannot be said to be suffering from any shortcoming. The case law relied upon by the Ld. Departmental Representative are not applicable on the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt no. 30047039939 in SBI, Najafgarh, New Delhi to her bank account in the same branch on 24.3.2008. Copy of the bank statement of the appellant as well as Sh. Mahender Pal Paliwal (appellant s husband) have been placed on record. Cash flow statement of the appellant has been given at page no. 62/PB evidencing cash payment of Rs. 8,45,000/- for stamp duty and incidental expenses for purchase of land at Bhopal. Not only this, the appellant had also submitted an affidavit from Smt. Swati Paliwal, co purchaser of the land, who has averred that she has invested Rs. 1 crore in purchase of land along with Smt. Pushpalata Paliwal and that she had financed this transaction out of loans taken from her father-in-law Sh. Ramesh Chand and her brother in law Sh. Lokesh Kumar, both of whom had received compensation from the Government for compulsory acquisition of land. She submitted copy of bank account as well as bank certificate as evidence of the transaction. The appellant submitted that the contention of the AO that the PAN of Smt. Swati Paliwal, given by her was not correct, doe snot hold any merit since, Smt. Swati Paliwal is also assessed to tax with the same AO and the mistake in PAN wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the said property was purchased by assessee jointly with Smt. Swati Paliwal, with each of them made an investment of Rs. 1 crore. The assessee has duly explained that she has paid her share of Rs. 1 crore for purchase of land through her bank account. Furthermore, it has been duly explained that other expenses on account of stamp duty and Registrar fees was shared 50:50 by her along with co purchaser Smt. Swati Paliwal. As regards the source, the assessee has duly explained that she had taken a loan of Rs. 1 crore from her husband Sh. Mahender Pal Paliwal by transfer from his account. The original source of money in the hands of the family of the assessee as well as Smt. Swati Paliwal was amount received as compensation on account of acquisition of land by the Government. In these circumstances, we find ourselves, in agreement with the Ld. CIT(A) that assessee has submitted all the necessary documents to establish the genuineness and veracity of the source of investment. Hence, addition made by the Ld. AO in this regard are not at all sustainable. Hence, we affirm the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) by which addition in this regard has been deleted. 12. Apropos the income of Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , assessee has submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that she had dealt with the purchase and sale of the shares during the year under consideration. The details of purchase and sale of shares were filed alongwith return of income and the assessee had incurred a loss of Rs. 39,375/- in these transactions. These were declared in the computation of income. Since this loss was not adjustable under any other head being Short Term Capital Loss, therefore, the income under the head Capital Gain was taken at NIL. In this regard, assessee further submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that during the assessment proceedings, she had filed the details of income and copy of date-wise ledger account of the broker, M/s Alankit Assignments Ltd. She contended that the Ld. AO did not find any fault in the accounts. Ld. AO also did not make any enquiry into these transactions and estimated the income under the head Capital Gain at Rs. 2 lacs. In these circumstances, Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition in this regard. 16. We find that Ld. CIT(A) properly taken into account the submissions made by the assessee. Assessee has submitted the details of share transactions made by her and Ld. AO has not found any fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
