9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our of a stranger. But it is also undisputed fact that on verification from the side of Shri Shakeel Khan through statement recorded under section 131 has shown that he had denied having given 15,00,000/- against the sale consideration as claimed by the assessee. Thereafter Shri Shakeel Khan had sold this plot subdividing to third party on subsequent date through registered sale deed. There is no evidence about subsequent sale and what status has been shown in the registered sale deed of Shri Shakeel Khan. On verification of bank account, it is also clear that assessee has withdrawn money from the bank account in which cash of 15,00,000/- were deposited for purchase of residential house. It is also found from the copy of account that assessee had also taken loan from Punjab National Bank for construction of the house. All these facts are required to be re-examined by the AO which has not been considered at the time of assessment as well as by the ld. CIT (A), which shall explain the nature of transaction. Accordingly, we set aside this issue to the file of AO for fresh decision after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. He was simply a Power of Attorney Holder of the assessee. It is his claim that he executed the registered Sale Deeds on behalf of the assessee. From the two Sale Deeds, relied upon by the assessee as an evidence to est4ablish that the land sold to Shri Shakeel Khan was subsequently sold by him, it is found that the sale consideration in both the cases were shown to have been made through cheques, but on enquiry from the bank it was found that the cheque for ₹ 1,10,000/- was never presented to the Standard Chartered Bank, M.I. Road, Jaipur for clearance and in the case of 2nd cheque for ₹ 6,50,000/-, the drawer of the cheque himself withdrew the money from the Bank of Baroda, Power House Branch, KE-56, Kabir Marg, Jaipur. In other words, the sale consideration was paid by the purchaser in cash only. In the absence of any other corroborative evidence it cannot be established that the Power of Attorney holder sold the land as owner of the land. The Power of Attorney holder acts on behalf of the persons who has executed the Power of Attorney. In these circumstances, assessee's reliance on the Power of Attorney for establishing the genuineness of the cash deposited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... greement to sale is signed only by the appellant and not by the purchaser and since the purchaser has denied the making of any agreement for purchase of land with the appellant or making the payment of ₹ 15 lacs in cash, the explanation furnished by this appellant remains unsubstantiated. The Will dated 04.06.2007 is also a document prepared and signed only by the appellant in favour of Shakeel Khan S/o Ameen Khan and it can be seen only as a self serving document submitted by the appellant. The power of attorney in favour of Shri Shakeel by Smt. Abha Jain has been accepted in the statement given on 11.10.2007 and it has been stated by Shakeel Khan that on the basis of said power of attorney he has sold the said land in parts on 28.09.2007 and 08.10.2007 for which sale deeds have been executed by him. The sale proceeds are stated to have been given to the appellant subsequent to the sale of plot as sale deed. From above it is clear that the appellant has failed to explain the source of cash deposits of ₹ 15 lacs in her savings bank account made in the month July, 2007. The plea of the appellant that all the three documents should be seen together and as per market prac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 15,00,000/- on various occasions i.e. the details of which are as under :- Date Amount 15.03.2007 1,00,000/- 15.04.2007 5,00,000/- 15.05.2007 5,00,000/- 04.06.2007 4,00,000/- Total 15,00,000/- The possession of the plot of land was handed over to Shri Shakeel Khan contemporaneously at the time of execution of above said documents. Therefore, the sale was completed for all purposes. The assessee had deposited this sum of ₹ 15,00,000/- in her bank account on 16.07.2007. The assessee has explained the source of cash deposit in her bank account and, therefore, there is no unexplained cash deposit in her bank account. 6.1. The assessee has taken us to the statement of Shri Shakeel Khan who was examined by the AO and also cross examined by the assessee. The sum and substance of the examination and cross examination of Shri Shakeel Khan was that Shakeel Khan is a unscrupulous person and has deliberately denying the execution of the Agreement dated 4th June, 2007. He had further denied the payment of ₹ 15,00,000/- to the assessee. The said Shakeel Khan had avoided and evaded all the relevant questions. In response to question nos. 9, 15 & 16, he has replied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2346;ैसे देने थे मैनें दे दिये। प्रश्न-15 क्या आपने ये दोनों चैक अपने बैंकखाते में जमा किया है? उत्तर-15 मुझे याद नहीं है मैं अपना दोनों बैंक खाते देखकर बताऊंगा। बैंक खातों की नकल अभी मेरे पास नहीं है। मैं कल दोनों बै ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... े हैं कृप्या बतायें एच.के. सेल्स किसकी है उसमें क्या व्यापार होता है तथा आप वहाॅं क्या करते है। उत्तर- एच.के. सेल्स शमषेर खान का है उनके पिता जी का नाम श्री हुसैन खान है वह मेरे सगा मामा है। एच.के. सेल्स में सेनेटर& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, there is a direct nexus between the sale and deposit of the amount in the bank account. 6.3. It was also contended that there was no prior relationship between the assessee and the seller. This was referred in the context that the Power of Attorney cannot be given to a person who is stranger to the assessee. It was submitted that there was no prior relationship between the assessee and Shakeel Khan, therefore, there is no question of issuing any Power of Attorney with an authority to sell and dispose off the property. The said power of attorney can only be given to the assessee in case of transfer of land in favour of Shakeel Khan. The ld. A/R has also drawn our attention to the various answers given by Shakeel Khan during his examination/cross examination for the purpose of strengthening his case that there was no prior relationship between them. 6.4. Lastly it was contended that ld. CIT (A) has accepted the version of sale of plot by sub-division in two smaller plots by Shakeel Khan for a consideration of ₹ 1,10,000/- and ₹ 6,50,000/- through two registered Sale Deeds. However, the Registration Authorities have evaluated the sale consideration for the purpose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly been taxed by the A.O. 9. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material on record. In the present case assessee was called upon to explain the deposits made in her savings bank account to the extent of ₹ 15,00,000/-. The assessee was required to satisfactorily explain the source of the cash deposit in the savings bank account during the assessment year. For the purpose of explaining the source of cash deposit, the assessee has submitted that the amount was received by her on account of sale of her plot to one Shri Shakeel Khan vide documents dated 4.6.2007 . The sale consideration received by her was deposited by her in savings bank account after finalization of sale. 9.1. The assessee transferred this plot on the basis of Agreement to Sale, Will and General Power of Attorney. The General Power of Attorney had been registered in favour of Shri Shakeel Khan on 04.06.2007. The assessee's case prima facie appears to be in favour of assessee that no one without any receipt of consideration would register the General Power of Attorney in favour of a stranger. But it is also undisputed fact that on verification from the side of Shri Shakeel Khan through statement re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
