9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1199X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld. CIT did not call for any remand report from the A.O. regarding these submissions.Therefore, under these facts and circumstances cannot sustain the additions made by the A.O. and the A.O. is directed to delete the additions - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n income of ₹ 12 lakhs as additional income. Subsequently, assessment was reopened as the assessee had not filed income tax return. This is second round of litigation. In earlier round, the Tribunal was pleased to restore the matter to the file of the A.O. with following directions: "12. The Ld. D.R. objected. 13. I have heard the rival contentions of both the parties. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that in this case, the assessee did not remain present before the A.O. The assessee has given written submission with documentary evidence and thereafter, the A.O. has given the remand report. I have gone through the assessment orders and CIT(A)'s orders and remand report and I am of the view that the assessees have produced some of the evidence, which requires verification on the part of the A.O. and the exact assessment can be made in these cases. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, I restore this matter back to the files of the A.O. to decide the matter afresh after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee." 4. The A.O. yet again sustained additions by observing as under: 5. Aggrieved by this, the assessee filed ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the earlier years. It would also be seen that on the backside, the date of receipt of money has also been mentioned which was the F.Y. 2004-05. Without considering the fact that the advances were made in the earlier years against which the promissory notes were obtained, the additions have been made. The Ld. A.O. without admiring the facts that the promissory notes are of the earlier years has made the addition only on the basis of the declaration made during the survey proceedings and with the remark that the assessee failed to produce books of accounts and documentary evidence to substantiate his claim. He further made the addition of ₹ 24,000/- on account of interst without considering the fact that the assessee has already offered the income of ₹ 50,000/- for interest. Cash balance of ₹ 2,00,000/- The assessee has explained the availability of cash in his explanation being amount recovered from Hundi's of ₹ 1,53,000/- and ₹ 42,400/- being interest received and ₹ 33,980/- being the opening cash balance which amounts to rupees more than two lakhs. Thus, the cash balance is explained to this extent and the balance of ₹ 1,00,000/- wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w household expenses is also uncalled for since the assessee is an agriculturist living in a small village does not require high expenditure to be incurred. The additions made deserves to be deleted." 7. On the contrary, Ld. D.R. opposed these submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. Ld. D.R. submitted the assessee was given sufficient opportunity. He should have his claim before the lower authorities. 8. In rejoinder, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has supplied all the evidences before the A.O. and the A.O. did not make any enquiry or verifications. Ld. Counsel further submitted that the casual approach of the authorities below is evident from the fact that in respect of purchase of agricultural land in the name of assessee's wife was sustained in the hands of the assessee. However, this investment does not pertain to the year under consideration. Therefore, no addition could have been made by the authorities below u/s 69 of the Act. He further contended that in respect of excess cash found, the assessee explained the cash on hand and the authorities have not verified the same. Further, in respect of the loan amount, it was contend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, which have been challenged by the assessee in ground Nos.1 to 7. All the grounds are being disposed together for the sake of convenience and brevity. In respect of cash on hand of ₹ 2,50,000/- the explanation of the assessee is that there was some cash on hand. This submission was made before the A.O. by the assessee. However, the A.O. did not verify the contention of the assessee. As per the assessee, there was repayment by the debtors of ₹ 1,62,524/- opening cash balance was ₹ 36,389/- interest received on amount received from debtors of ₹ 40,000/- sale of opening stock of ₹ 35,800/- proceed of sale of stock of ₹ 2,000/-. All these aspects ought to have been verified by the A.O. Even the Ld. CIT did not call for any remand report from the A.O. regarding these submissions. I therefore, under these facts and circumstances cannot sustain the additions made by the A.O. and the A.O. is directed to delete the additions. Thus, ground Nos.1 to 7 of the assessee's appeal are allowed. Appeal of the assessee is allowed. 10. Now we take up the ITA No.13/Ind/2018 for the A.Y. 2005-06. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. That on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case are stated hereunder: 1. The assessee is an individual deriving income from small business of fertilizer and interest income. The assessee is mainly an agriculturist in the status of HUF. Since the assessee does not have any taxable income, he did not file any return. A survey took place at the business premises/residence of the assessee on 30.01.2005. During the course of the survey the assessee surrendered the income of ₹ 12,00,000/- under various heads without understanding the provisions of law and on account of pressure of the survey party. In response to notice u/s 148, the assessee filed the return declaring total income of ₹ 4,55,000/- under the following heads: Interest income ₹ 55,000/- Construction of house ₹ 3,00,000/- On account of cash ₹ 1,00,000/- Total ₹ 4,55,000/- 2. The assessment was made u/s 144 by making the additions on the basis of income declared in the survey. The matter was taken up before the Hon'ble Tribunal. The Hon'ble Tribunal set aside the matter on the file of the A.O. to decide the matter afresh for verifying the evidences filed by the assessee (pg.35 of PB) 3. During th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence to substantiate his claim. Addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- for alleged investment in agriculture land The assessee has explained that the agriculture land in the name of wife has been purchased in the year 1993 and 1998 and as such the investment cannot be added as income of this year. The Ld. A.O. without admiring the facts that the agriculture land were purchased in the earlier year has made the addition only on the basis of the declaration made during the survey proceedings and with the remark that the assessee failed to furnish the source of investment made by him during the year under consideration. Addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- for alleged unexplained investment of stock of agriculture produce. The assessee has explained that the agriculture stock was on account of agricultural income of the HUF of the assessee wherein the total income has been shown. The HUF holds the 10 hec. Of agricultural land. It was specifically stated that the assessee does not deal in agricultural produce and as such there is no question of taxing the same as undisclosed income. The Ld. A.O. without considering the submissions has made the additions that the agriculture produce wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
