9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ration cards which contain the particulars of the donor including addresses, details of family members which were sufficient to prove the identity of the person, in such a situation, we hold that assessee was able to discharge the primary onus and thereafter it is for the Assessing Officer to verify the veracity of these documents or issuing the summons u/s 131(2) to make the presence of the donors which he was miserably failed to do so - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 4328/Del./2011 - - - Dated:- 11-3-2015 - Shri G. C. Gupta And Shri B. C. Meena,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri Mayank Jain Madhur Jain, Advocates For the Respondent : Ms. Y. Kakkar, Senior DR ORDER Per B. C. Meena, Accountant Member : This appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of CIT (Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi dated 29.07.2011 for the assessment year 2000-01. 2. In this case, the assessment u/s 147/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was finalized on 17.12.2007 and an addition of ₹ 5,03,000/- was made which was the amount of gift received from three persons on 15.04.1999. The CIT (A) has confirmed the addition and now the assessee is in appeal before us. The ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice under section 148 was issued for reassessment proceedings, no doubt, the Assessing Officer was required to record reasons which led him to believe that there was escaped income. Law does not mandate the Assessing Officer to suo motu supply the copy of those 'reasons to believe' to the assessee. It is for the assessee and if assessee so chooses can file objections thereto. Only when such objections are filed, it becomes the duty of the Assessing Officer to dispose of all those objections first by passing speaking order and if the objections are rejected it gives a cause to the assessee to challenge the said order of the Assessing Officer by filing appropriate writ petition. This is the law declared by the Supreme Court in the case of GKN Drive Shafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO [2003]259 ITR 19/[2002]125 Taxman 963(SC)[Para 6]. In the instant case, the assessee did not ask for these 'reasons to believe'. The assessee rather participated in the reassessment proceedings. When the reassessment orders were passed and the assessee felt aggrieved there against, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). In this appeal, he challenged the validity of reassess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e matter be remitted back to the Commissioner (Appeals). The revenue shall supply 'reasons to believe' recorded by the Assessing Officer within four weeks from today. On the supply of these 'reasons to believe', it would be open to the assessee to make submissions before the Commissioner (Appeals) based on those reasons, challenging the validity of reassessment proceedings and the Commissioner (Appeals) shall decide this issue on merits after hearing both the parties. [Para 9] Since there is no legal and procedural irregularity in issuing notice u/s 148, the Assessing Officer has recorded the required reasons which led him to believe that there was escapement of income. Law does not provide or mandate that the Assessing Officer shall suo motu shall supply the copy of those reasons to believe to the assessee. It is for assessee and if assessee chooses to ask for reasons then he/she can file objection thereto. Only when such objections are filed, it becomes the duty of the Assessing Officer to dispose of all those objections first by passing a speaking order and if the objections are rejected then it gives a cause to the assessee to challenge such order by filing a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee has also submitted copy of Income-tax returns of these donors. Copy of bank statements and cheques/drafts were also submitted. The Assessing Officer has not verified the veracity of these affidavits, confirmations, bank accounts, ration cards and gift deeds. He had asked the assessee to produce the donors. The Assessing Officer had not made any effort to issue summons to these donors. By filing these primary documents, the assessee was able to discharge the primary onus. It was the duty of the Assessing Officer to verify the veracity of these gift deeds/affidavits and other documents prior to arriving at a conclusion for rejecting the same. Further, the Assessing Officer has also not taken the investigation to any logical end when he was empowered by the law for issuing the summons to make the presence of these donors. Since the Assessing Officer has failed to take investigation to the logical end when the assessee has discharged his primary onus, in such a situation, the Assessing Officer was not justified in dismissing or rejecting the evidences submitted before him. The reliance is placed on the decision of Hon ble Patna High Court in the case of Sarogi Credit Corporatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the entries in the books of account, having accepted the explanation offered by the third parties with regard to their sources of money in part at least, there was no material for the Tribunal to hold that the assessee had not discharged the onus on him and the finding to that effect must be held to be without any evidence and, hence, wholly illegal and the conclusions drawn perverse. Therefore, the assessee had discharged the onus within the meaning of section 68 of the Act for the cash credits and the Appellate Tribunal was not justified in maintaining the addition of ₹ 15,000 as the assessee s income form undisclosed sources. Since the assessee has submitted affidavits, copy of gift deeds and copy of ration cards which contain the particulars of the donor including addresses, details of family members which were sufficient to prove the identity of the person, in such a situation, we hold that assessee was able to discharge the primary onus and thereafter it is for the Assessing Officer to verify the veracity of these documents or issuing the summons u/s 131(2) to make the presence of the donors which he was miserably failed to do so. In view of these factual matrix ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
