9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Act for short), which relates to assessment year 2005-06 and impugns the order dated 8.7.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). 2. In the return of income filed for the AY 2005-06, the appellant had declared taxable income of ₹ 4,05,265/- from the business of sale/purchase/financing of three-wheeler/scooters on commission basis and income earned under the head income from house property . 3. The Assessing Officer ( AO ), vide assessment order dated 28.12.2007, made addition of ₹ 36,80,000/- as income from undisclosed sources invoking Section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash deposits of ₹ 92,80,000/- in the bank accounts of the appellant and his minor sons- Master Sahil Sethi and Sarik Sethi. These deposits were made on different dates and sometimes there were multiple deposits even on a single day. The appellant, on being asked, could not furnish details and explain source of deposits. The AO had made addition of peak cash in hand of ₹ 36,80,000/-. 4. The appellant in the appeal, for the first time, took the stand and position that he had had received ₹ 33,00,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itn Sh. R.K. Garg, Sh. Gaurav Gupta, Sh. Dinesh Garg and Sh. Anuj Garg on 27.08.2004 for a consideration of ₹ 45 lakhs. Copy of agreement for sale has been furnished in support which has been placed on record. The documents in original have also been produced for verification during the course of the appellate proceedings. 6.4. It has been submitted that the assessee and his wife received a sum of ₹ 33 Iakhs as advance for sale of property from the proposed buyers, namely, Sh. R.K. Garg, Sh. Gaurav Gupta, Sh. Dinesh Garg and Sh. Anuj Garg, Rio 8-256, Suraj Mal Vihar, Delhi-110092. Confirmation letters along with PAN Nos. and Income-tax returns of the above persons have been furnished in support which have been placed on record. 6.5. It has been submitted that the assessee has deposited the said amount in UTI Bank, Krishna Nagar, Delhi, in two bank accounts opened in the names of his sons, Sh. Sahil Sethi and Sank Sethi. Both his sons are minor and the account is being operated by him as their guardian The amount has been deposited in the said account on various dates. He has also withdrawn cash from the bank on various dates and again deposited the same at tim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue pertains to addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. There were certain deposits made in cash in the bank account from time to time. According to the Assessing Officer, assessee could not explain some of these entries and taking into account the peak of cash in hand, on ₹ 36.80 lakhs addition was made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. CIT (Appeal), however, deleted this addition. In the circumstances, the Department preferred further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ). 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has produced certain papers indicating that in the appeal notice was issued to the assessee for January, 2010, when the assessee appeared. However, on that date the representative of the Department filed an application for adjournment on the ground that he wanted to see the assessment records. Case was adjourned to 16' March, 2010. On that date again, the departmental representative sought an adjournment stating that he intended to file a paper book. Acceding to his request, the case was again adjourned to 5th May, 2010. It is pointed out by Mr. Kapoor, learned counsel for the appellant, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. Counsel for the appellant accepts that the issue raised in the present appeal relates to facts. It is, however, submitted that the decision of the Tribunal is perverse on two counts. Firstly, the Tribunal had directed the appellant to furnish documents/details in the form of cash flow statements, affidavits of intending purchaser and confirmations, which were furnished, but these have not been considered and given due evidentiary weightage. Secondly, in case further enquiry and investigation was required, the matter should have been remitted to the AO for detailed scrutiny. 10. We have considered the said contention but do not think that the order passed by the Tribunal would fall and can be categorized as a perverse order i.e. an order which no reasonable person well versed in the field would have passed in the given facts and circumstances. Relevant facts and evidence has been considered. 11. The facts of the case are rather glaring and one-sided. The appellant accepts and admits that cash deposit of ₹ 92,80,000/- were made in bank accounts belonging to him and his two minor sons during the period relevant to the AY 2005-06. These cash deposits were made on differ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
