9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 1174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This appeal has been filed against the order of CIT(A) Faridabad dated 21.01.2020 for AY 2011-12. 2. Delay of 237 days in filing appeal before the tribunal. I have heard arguments of both the sides on the prayer of appellant seeking condonation of delay of 237 days in filing appeal before the tribunal as per learned counsel of assessee, the copy of order of ld. CIT(A) dated 21.01.2020 was received belatedly and the appeal should have been filed latest by 27.03.2020 but the lockdown due to pandemic of Covid-19 was started from 23.03.2020 and appeals could have been filed only on 27.11.2020 by the delay of 237 days therefore in view of order of Hon ble Supreme Court dated 27.04.2021 bearing miscellaneous application no. 665/2021 in suo moto Writ Petition, SMW(C) No. 3/2020, the Hon ble Supreme Court of India has again restore the order dated 23.03.2020 and in continuation of the order dated 08.03.2021 direct that the period of limitation as prescribed under any general or special law in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, whether condonable or not, shall stand extended till further order. In view of above it is concluded that the delay in filing appeal before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Paper Book) who is holding joint bank account with Assessee in HDFC bank. The said amount was questionable during the course of assessment proceeding in the case of Smt. Ratni and the very same bank account was also scrutinized during the process which is subject to the said assessment of Sh. Ram Kishan also and further it is also to mention that the interest earned on the said amount was offered to tax by Smt Ratni during the said year and was accepted by Ld. AO while passing the assessment order in her case. It is further submitted that the amount deposited in assessee's account (Rs. 17,50,000) is the said amount which was withdrawn on the earlier occasion as can be seen from the debit entries and the same was to be put to use for agricultural purpose however the same could not be accomplished, as such the said amount was deposited back in the bank on different dates. Copy of the chart is enclosed. However, despite submitting the facts of the case, Ld. CIT(A) enhanced the amount by Rs. 20,00,000/-. The submission filed during the course of the appellate proceedings was not been taken into consideration. The amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- that has been enhanced by Ld. CIT(A) was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the assessee was having joint bank account with his wife Smt. Ratni Devi who sold agricultural land jointly owned with sister of wife Smt. Sona received advance in cash of Rs. 40 lakh from the purchaser on the condition that the cash will be returned at the time of completion of transaction of sale of land and entire consideration against sale of land will be given by the purchaser to the seller that is Smt. Ratni and her sister Smt. Sona through cheque or draft. The learned counsel submitted that the above understanding wife of assessee received Rs. 40 lakh in cash out of which Rs.20 lakh was deposited to the joint bank account of Smt. Ratni with her husband Shri. Ramkrishan/Assessee and Rs. 20 lakh to the bank account of their son Shri Dinesh on 19.10.2010. The learned counsel further explained that the sale deed was executed by Smt. Ratni and her sister Smt. Sona on 08.12.2010 in favour of purchaser receiving consideration of Rs. 1,82,00,000/- through cheque before registration authority. The learned counsel drawing our attention towards page 11 of assessee paper book submitted that the assessee was under obligation to refund cash advance of Rs. 40 lakh to the purchaser o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d subsequent withdrawals on 11.02.2011 and 16.02.2011 totaling cash of Rs. 48,50,000/- cumulatively substantiate that the assessee successfully demonstrated source of deposit of Rs. 20 lakh cash and its refund to the purchaser including Rs. 20 lakh deposited to the bank of his son Shri Dinesh who was away from home due to his job/work at the time of returning of cash on completion of transaction as agreed between seller i.e. wife of assessee and the purchaser. 10. The learned Senior DR have also not controverted the cash flow chart submitted along with brief synopsis and which was also submitted before the authorities below by the assessee. On cross verification of copy of bank account available pages 11 and 12 of assessee paper book from where it is amply clear that the assessee during period from 19.10.2010 to 25.02.2011 within the financial period of from 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2011 there was cash deposit of Rs. 37,50,000/- and cash withdrawals of Rs. 96,26,000/- therefore the amount of cash deposit is much lesser than the withdrawals therefore the addition of Rs. 37,50,000/- made by the AO do not survive. It is also pertinent to note that in the beginning on 19.10.2010 there wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
