9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... end of the department since an inquiry was being made against him as to how he had made cash payments of such huge amount which had not been reflected in the account books. The order of the Tribunal thus suffers from patent perversity by not taking into account the cumulative factors which are in favour of the assessee and by confirming the additions made against the assessee and accepting the statement of the commission agent as gospel truth. Merely because the appellant was a retired employee and filed his return showing agricultural income admittedly being a owner of agricultural land, the assessing officer was not justified in making the additions on the assumption that the assessee had tried to include his past savings and unaccounted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income to the tune of ₹ 7,00,000/-. The returned income was accepted on 13.02.2006. Subsequently, on account of the cash deposits of ₹ 7,23,000/- in the savings account of the assessee, the source of the said cash deposit was sought to be explained by the revenue. The explanation of the assessee was that he was owner of 20 acres and 7 kanals of agricultural land in his own name and out of which, there was an orchard of 8 acres, which was being cultivated. The sale proceeds of fruit of ₹ 9,02,215/- had been deposited and one M/s. Gurdaspurian Di Hatti Food, an Commission Agent of Batala had made the payments. The concerned assessing authority at Abohar accordingly wrote to his counter part at Batala regarding the payment ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same were true and correct since the said firm had denied having purchased any fruit from the appellant. The addition was thus, upheld by holding that the source of cash deposits had not been discharged by producing any positive evidence. In the appeal before the Tribunal, challenge was raised to the notice dated 10.02.2011 under Section 148 of the Act and the addition made on this basis. It was pleaded that no opportunity had been given to the assessee to cross examine the statement of the partner of the commission agent. The Tribunal held that the initial assessment on 13.02.2006 was in a summary manner and once the Assessing Officer had come to know that the deposits were ingenuine, the agricultural income was treated as non-agricult ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch have been now added to his income as income from undisclosed sources. The assessee was never given a proper opportunity to cross examine or rebut the stand of the commission agent who was at that point of time was on the receiving end of the department since an inquiry was being made against him as to how he had made cash payments of such huge amount which had not been reflected in the account books. The order of the Tribunal thus suffers from patent perversity by not taking into account the cumulative factors which are in favour of the assessee and by confirming the additions made against the assessee and accepting the statement of the commission agent as gospel truth. Merely because the appellant was a retired employee and filed his re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
