9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 998X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation Return (AIR) for the financial year concerned, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") after recording reasons to believe that income of the assessee escaped assessment. There was no compliance of the notice. subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued various notices under section 142(1) of the Act as under which also remained un-complied with except on 18/01/2013, when the assessee alongwith his son attended and sought adjournment. S.No. Date of issue of notice u/s 142(1) Date fixed for hearing Status of compliance 1. 26/10/2012 Calling for return of income No compliance 2. 23/11/2012 11/12/2012 No compliance 3. 08/01/2013 18/01/2013 Assessee and his son attended. 4. Adjoined to 22/01/2013 No compliance 5. 08/02/2013 27/02/2013 No compliance 2.1 The Assessing Officer issued a final show cause notice on 12/03/2013, fixing the case on 18/03/2013, which also remained uncomplied with. In view of the limitation for completion of the assessment, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and held the cash of Rs. 1,32,40,000/- deposited in the bank account maintained with Bank of Rajas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel referred to affidavits of the assessee and his sons filed in the paper book. He also referred to affidavit of the village numberdar, wherein he has claimed the prevalent market rate of land in the village at Rs. 20.00 lakhs per acre and certified that sale consideration of Rs. 80 lakhs was received by the assessee. In view of the affidavit of numberdar, the learned counsel contended that the assessee received sale consideration of Rs. 80 lakhs as per prevalent market rate of the land, irrespective of the sale amount mentioned in the sale deeds. The Ld. counsel relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. P.K. Noorjahan 237 ITR 570 (SC) submitted that ITO has discretion in the matter of treating the unexplained source of investment as income of assessee and he is not obliged to treat unexplained source of investment as income under s. 69 in every case. The learned counsel also relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Intezar Ali, 372 ITR 651 (All). The assessee also referred to decision of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle-6, Hyderabad Vs. MPB Kutumba Rao reported in 43 taxmann.com 205 (Hyd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds sold by the assessee and his sons or not. The sale deeds of said land are available on page 4 to 23 of the paper book. Details of sale transactions, stamp duty, name of purchasers, etc. mentioned in these deeds, are summarized as under: Page No. Of paper book Name(s) of sellers Name(s) of purchasers Sale amount recorded in the deed Mode of receipt of sale consideration 4 to 8 Assessee Narinder Kumar HUF Rs.6,81,500/- Received through draft No. 008430 dated 17/05/2006 HDFC bank Revari 9 to 12 Assessee Smt Kanchan Devi Rs.6,81,500/- Rs. 6,50,000/- received through bank draft No. 226513 dated 17/05/2006 and Ruby 31,500 in cash 13 to 17 Sons of assesse Smt Hemalatha Agrawal Rs.6,81,500/- In cash 18 to 22 Sons of assesse Satender kumar, HUF Rs.6,81,500/- In cash 6. On perusal of back sides of page no. 4, 9, 13 and 18 of the paper book, we find that the registration authority has recorded that both the seller and purchaser were present before him and both parties accepted the facts of the document after listening and understanding the same and accepted the fact of exchange of the sale amount recorded in the sale deed. In the sale deeds also it is clearly ment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned as financed from out of the savings from the income of the properties which were left by her mother's first husband. This contention of the assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer and investment was held as unexplained. The Hon'ble High Court observed that having regard to her age and in the circumstances in which she was placed, she could not be credited with having made any income of her own and held that a discretion has been conferred on the ITO under s. 69 of the Act to treat the source of investment as the income of the assessee if the explanation offered by the assessee is not found satisfactory and the said discretion has to be exercised keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the particular case. 12. Facts and circumstances of the present case are different from the above case cited by the assessee as in the present case, the assessee is of matured age and the purchasers of land have denied of giving any extra money to the assessee. 13. In the case of CIT Vs Intezar Ali (supra), cash of Rs. 77,80,000/- was deposited in the bank account, which the Assessing Officer held as unexplained. However, the Tribunal found that the assessee himself made the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
