9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary evidences for carrying out agricultural activities. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. Since the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A) follows a binding judicial precedent, no fault could not be found in the same. We order so. Addition on Account of Loan - Addition of NRNR deposits - HELD THAT:- We find that the whole basis of addition by Ld. AO is the statement taken by other authorities. However, these statements have not been confronted to the assessee. Further, no independent verification has been carried out by Ld. AO to establish the fact that these deposits, in fact, constitute income of the assessee. For this reason alone, addition has been deleted by Tribunal in the case of Smt. Sushila Ramasamy. The remittances have come through banking channels from foreign sources and therefore, the same could not be considered as assessee s income. We order so. The corresponding grounds raised by the revenue stand dismissed. Addition on account of Accretion to Assets - HELD THAT:- We find that the stated facts could not be controverted by revenue before us. The assessee is able to demonstrate that it has extra sources to the extent of Rs. 60.95 Lacs as against im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailed to substantiate her claim that only 1/6th share was hers, that the payment of onmoney had been confirmed and that the receiving party had already paid taxes on the on-money. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the assessee's claim of agricultural income though no evidence had been furnished at the scrutiny stage. 3.1 The assessee did not furnish any evidence to substantiate her claim of agricultural income though the onus of proof lies with the assessee. 3.2 The ld.CIT(A) did not consider the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case CIT vs. .R.Venkataswamy Naidu (29 ITR 529) wherein it was held that the assessee had to put before the authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion that the income which was sought to be assessed was agricultural income and it was not for the authorities to prove that it was not agricultural income. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in allowing assessee's appeal as she had claimed that the sworn statements recorded by the Enforcement Directorate from the Manager of Indian Bank, Smt Suchitra and the then Manager of State Bank of India, Shri Jayaprakash, were not give ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Ms. J. Jayalalithaa, former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and registered a case. In the charge sheet, the lists of assets found in the name of Ms. J. Jayalalithaa and her associates were also enclosed and the copy of the same was given to accused persons. The assessee figured in this list and accordingly, the case was reopened wherein impugned additions were made. The Ld. CIT(A) provided certain relief to the assessee against which the revenue is in further appeal before us. The impugned issues are adjudicated as under. 3. Payment of on-money 3.1 The assessee, along with other co-owners, sold certain property situated at 1, Luz Avenue which was covered by Doc. Nos.247/95 to 252/95 for Rs. 10.87 Lacs. The DVAC report mentioned that an amount of Rs. 76 Lacs was paid over and above the value as mentioned in the documents. Consequently, a search was conducted on the seller of the property Mrs. S. Ramayamma w/o Sri S.Nageshwar Rao wherein she admitted to have received the said amount of Rs. 76 Lacs in cash. The property was registered under six documents for a total consideration of Rs. 54 Lacs in favor of separate entities / persons, assessee being one of them. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led by Smt. L.Masilamani and Rs. 25 Lacs availed by Smt. V.Gunabhushani. Both these persons availed the loan and made investment in BBRPL. Ms. T.Chitra was MD of that concern. The amount of Rs. 3.75 Crores so received by BBRPL was utilized to make advances to various concerns in which the assessee and two others were partners. Subsequently, the loans with the banks were discharged against deposits. The corporate entity BBRPL became partner in the concerns. The enforcement directorate (ED) recorded statement of Smt. Sucharitha (the then Manager of Indian Bank) as well as from Sri Jaiaprakash (Manager of State Bank of India). From the statement of Smt. Sucharitha, it was seen that the drafts and currencies for the various deposits held in the name of Smt. Sushila Ramasamy were received from or through a messenger of assessee. In the light of these facts, it was alleged that the assessee was the beneficial owner of such deposits and the same was to be considered for assessment in the hands of the assessee. 5.2 The assessee opposed the same on the ground that statement recorded by ED could not be applied directly by any other department as the proceedings before ED and Income Tax de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loans of Rs. 31.73 Lacs from M/s Namadhu MGR and another loan of Rs. 11.72 Lacs from M/s Vinod Video Visions. Similarly M/s Vinod Vide Vision obtained loan of Rs. 17.50 Lacs from M/s Jaya Publication. Considering these loans, sources were available to the extent of Rs. 60.95 Lacs as against impugned addition of Rs. 45.23 Lacs as made by Ld. AO. Accepting the same, Ld. CIT(A) deleted the impugned addition against which the revenue is in further appeal before us. 6.3 We find that the stated facts could not be controverted by revenue before us. The assessee is able to demonstrate that it has extra sources to the extent of Rs. 60.95 Lacs as against impugned addition of Rs. 45.23 Lacs. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere in the impugned order, on this issue. The corresponding grounds raised by the revenue stand dismissed. The appeal of the revenue stand dismissed. Assessment Year 1996-97 7. The issues to be adjudicated in this year are (i) Claim of Agricultural income for Rs. 3.60 Lacs; (ii) Addition of NRNR deposits for Rs. 218.75 Lacs; (iii) Unexplained cash credit for Rs. 30 Lacs. 8. Facts as well as issues qua first two additions are common as in AY 1995-96. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
