9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 759X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taxes on the outstanding amount in this impugned bank account to the revenue authority of U.K under specific disclosure facility. Only in the absence of explanation about the nature and source of income, the explanation offered by the assessee in the opinion of the AO is not satisfactory and the sum so credited may be charged to income-tax as the income of the assessee of the previous year. The assessee had given the explanation about the nature and source of the investments and the explanation offered by him was wrongly not accepted by the AO and the CIT. Once the Tribunal as such noticed the said background and had rightly come to the conclusion that the name of the assessee was withdrawn even prior to the notice being served upon him, the addition could not be made by the AO The factual matrix could not be disputed regarding this aspect by the counsel for the revenue. The justifiable explanation as such is given that the nephew had got his signatures. Sufficient explanation has been given regarding this fact by filing an affidavit, which has not been taken into consideration by the Assessing Officer or by the Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessee being an agriculturist and o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anding amount in the impugned bank account to the revenue authority of U.K under specific disclosure facility of all the irregularities in U.K as per the certificate of C.A i.e. M/s Stonegate Trinity LLP. The certificate had further been verified and confirmed by HM Revenue Customs (HMRC) Authority of U.K. Resultantly, addition made by the relevant Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax was deleted while allowing the appeals. 3. The substantial questions of law of which are sought to be determined by the revenue read as under:- (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred on facts and in law by holding that the distinction between the US Ddenominated account in the name of Sh. Joginder Singh Chatha and the GBP-denominated account No. 11276695 being a Swiss (Geneva) Account containing the impugned transactions which have not been disclosed in the disclosure report is insufficient to decide that the amounts transacted are not properly explained or shown to be genuine and therefore to be brought to tax under the statute in the hands of the Respondent. ii) Whether on the facts and in the circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ank account in HSBC Bank, Geneva was not his and he had not visited the bank for opening of any type of account. He alleged that his nephew was residing in U.K and he had got his signatures on some papers when he was in India and he is having 10 acres of land and had no other source of income. He had enclosed copies of the bank account maintained with the Jalandhar Central Cooperative Bank and KCC limit with Indian Overseas Bank, Shahkot. The Assessing Officer as such rejected the affidavit dated 22.08.2014 regarding this aspect that he has no bank account or any property abroad and that he was never involved in such bank transactions and came to the conclusion that the bank accounts belong to the assessee and the transactions therein had been made by the assessee. The finding recorded was that the assessee had failed to offer any explanation about the nature and source of investment of the deposits. While relying upon the provisions of Section 69 of the Act penalty proceedings were initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and income was accordingly assessed for the requisite amounts of the deposits, vide order dated 29.04.2015. 6. The Commissioner of Income Tax had dismissed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tial questions of law are made out in the above facts and circumstances. 9. We are of the considered opinion that these are question of facts which have been adjudicated upon by the Tribunal regarding the deposits in the said accounts. Apparently, there is no material on record to show that the amounts were deposited by the assessee, as the account was opened on 25.03.2003. Apparently the first visit of the assessee was in the year 1985 was to U.K. and there was nothing on record that at the time of his visit abroad he had opened the said account in Geneva. It is the case of the assessee that his nephew had got his signatures on some papers. The second visit was in the year 2006 and third visit was in the year 2012. The profile of the bank as such would go on to show that name of the assessee was struck off from the said account on 11.06.2004, even prior to his visit in the year 2006 and notice was issued in the year 2014. We are of the considered opinion that the explanation offered by the assessee regarding the amounts belonging to his nephew was justified. It is not disputed that the documents as such which were filed showing the certificate of the C.A. whereby the said person h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion offered by him was wrongly not accepted by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax. Once the Tribunal as such noticed the said background and had rightly come to the conclusion that the name of the assessee was withdrawn even prior to the notice being served upon him, the addition could not be made by the Assessing Officer. The factual matrix could not be disputed regarding this aspect by the counsel for the revenue. The justifiable explanation as such is given that the nephew had got his signatures. Sufficient explanation has been given regarding this fact by filing an affidavit, which has not been taken into consideration by the Assessing Officer or by the Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessee being an agriculturist and only having a small holding of land apparently could not be in possession of such huge amounts, which were also in foreign currency. Nothing as such was produced on record that the same was transferred from India where he was doing some business. It is neither the case of the revenue that the amounts were credited from his income while doing business at abroad and neither he was based abroad for such long periods to generate that kind of i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
