9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 758X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals)-II, Chennai in ITA No. 252/07-08 dated 15-12-2010 for the assessment year 1995-96. ITA No. 404/Mds/2011 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals)-II, Chennai in ITA No. 253/07-08 dated 15-12-2010 for the assessment year 1996-97. ITA No. 405/Mds/2011 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals)-II, Chennai in ITA No. 7/03-04 dated 15-12-2010 for the assessment year 2000-01. ITA No. 406/Mds/2011 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals)-II, Chennai in ITA No. 208/04-05 dated 15-12- 2010 for the assessment year 2002-03. ITA No. 407/Mds/2011 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals)-II, Chennai in ITA No. 410/06-07 dated 15-12-2010 for the assessment year 2004-05. ITA No. 408/Mds/2011 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals)-II, Chennai in ITA No. 254/07-08 dated 15-12-2010 for the assessment year 2005-06. ITA No. 409/Mds/2011 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(Appeals)-II, Chennai in ITA No. 204/08-09 d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(A) had dismissed the assessee s appeal and consequently the assessee was in appeal before the Tribunal again. It was the submission that in the wealth-tax return the assessee had, for the purpose of determining the value of the house owned by her at Koothanallur, adopted a gross monthly rent at ₹ 3,000/-. It was the submission that the assessee had only one house which was a self-occupied property. It was the submission that this property at Koothanallur was in Thanjavur. The learned authorised representative drew our attention to the wealth-tax return filed by the assessee for the year ended 31-03- 1991 to substantiate his submissions. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer had assumed that the property had been given on rent and consequently adopted the fair market value at ₹ 3,000/- and had made an addition of ₹ 30,000/- under the head income from house property . It was the submission that as the house property was self-occupied, no notional rent could be added under the head income from house property . It was the submission that the addition as made by the Assessing Officer and as confirmed by the learned CIT(A) was liable to be deleted. 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... property sold was a vacant land, the old building there on the land had been demolished and sold. It was the submission that the amount had also been recorded in the books of account of the assessee as sale proceeds from the old demolished building. It was the submission that in the course of search these books were found and the entries in the books were liable to be accepted as genuine especially when no adverse evidence had been found. It was the submission that this transaction related to the assessment year 1991-92 and the search had taken place in 1996. The assessment was completed in 1997 for the first time. It was the submission that even in the assessment order passed originally on 27-03-1997 the Assessing Officer had recognized that the building existed in the earlier years list of fixed assets and the same did not appear during the relevant assessment year. It was the submission that the fact that the building existed during the earlier years and did not exist during the relevant assessment year itself proves the demolition of the building. It was the submission that the same could only be treated as the capital gains arising from the demolition and sale of the long ter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned Sr. Standing Counsel on behalf of the Revenue vehemently supported the order of the learned CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee could not explain the entries in her bank account and consequently the same was liable to be the unexplained income of the assessee. 12. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order clearly shows that the assessee has disclosed agricultural income of ₹ 52,900/-. Copy of the Income Expenditure Account filed along with the return of income for the assessment year 1991-92 on 30-06-1995 found at pages 1 to 3 of the assessee s paper book clearly shows that the income is basically on account of agricultural operations. The search has also not revealed that the assessee has got any other source of income. It is further noticed that the bank balances disclosed in the returns have not been disputed by the Revenue. Obviously, these deposits in the bank would have been taken into consideration while preparing the Income Expenditure Account and the Balance Sheet of the assessee. There being no other source of income also having been found even after the search, it cannot be assumed that the assessee has unexp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 1,23,400/- as the agricultural income as against ₹ 52,900/- disclosed in the assessment year 1991-92. It was the submission that for the assessment year 1991-92 the agricultural income as disclosed by the assessee had also been accepted by the same Assessing Officer even in the original proceedings. It was the submission that the addition on this count may be deleted. 15. In reply, the learned Sr. Standing Counsel on behalf of the Revenue vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A). It was the submission that no evidence in regard to the land holdings or the agricultural operations had been produced before the Assessing Officer. 16. We have considered the rival submissions. At the out set it is noticed that the assessment itself is a very old assessment and it would be practically impossible for a normal person to keep old records. Further the fact that the Assessing Officer had in the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1991-92 accepted the claim of agricultural income clearly shows that the Revenue was well aware that the assessee had agricultural lands and was doing agricultural operations. A perusal of the wealth- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was in Chennai and none of the creditors were willing to travel to Chennai to depose before the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that the independent letters issued by the Assessing Officer had been responded to itself shows that the creditors were genuine. It was the further submission that none of the creditors had also denied the transactions with the assessee. 18. In reply, the learned Sr. Standing Counsel on behalf of the Revenue vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A). It was the submission that other than the confirmation letters, no other evidences had been produced to prove the claim of creditors. 19. We have considered the rival submissions. As mentioned earlier, these transactions are more than 20 years old and when the second round of investigation itself was going on, the matters were more than 15 years old. A perusal of the original assessment order shows that the addition on this count was practically the total credits in the bank accounts of the assessee. For example, for the assessment year 1992-93 the addition on account of the investment in the bank account was to the extent of ₹ 8,15,000/- and the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deduction towards self-supervision had also been granted to the assessee. It was the submission that in view of the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. V. T. Rajendran reported in 288 ITR 312 , the Assessing Officer may be directed to have the property valued by applying the PWD rates for the relevant assessment year on the first part and to grant the assessee the benefit of deduction towards self-supervision. It was the submission that if this is done, there would be no variation from the amount disclosed by the assessee. 21. In reply, the learned Sr. Standing Counsel on behalf of the Revenue vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A). It was the submission that the DVO had valued the cost of construction at ₹ 72,32,100/- including the cost of furniture. It was the further submission that the Assessing Officer had categorically recorded that the assessee had not objected to the show cause notice issued in the proposal for the completion of the assessment u/s 144 of the Act wherein it was pointed out that the valuation of the building had been referred to the Valuation Cell of the Income Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... truction at nearly ₹ 40 lakhs, the addition as made by the Assessing Officer on this ground stands deleted. 23. The eighth issue in all these appeals relates to the receipt of gift on the inaugural function of the Kalyanamandapam from various friends and relatives. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer had treated the gifts received as unexplained credit in the hands of the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee had disclosed having received gifts of ₹ 1,35,435/- which was reduced by the learned CIT(A) in the original appellate proceedings to ₹ 95,435/-. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer had asked the assessee to produce the details of the names and addresses of the donors, date and amount and mode of receipt with documentary evidence which the assessee could not produce. It was the submission that the disallowance may be deleted. In the alternative prayer was that the disallowance may be reduced. 24. In reply, the learned Sr. Standing Counsel on behalf of the Revenue vehemently supported the order of the learned CIT(A). It was the submission that no evidence had been produced by the assessee to substantiate her claim. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
