9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 846X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1 Jalandhar, (in brevity the CIT(A) ) order passed u/s 250 (6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in brevity the Act) for assessment year 2000-01, 1999-00 2000-01. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Nawanshahr, (in brevity the ld. AO) order passed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act. 2. These appeals were filed with delay of 740 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay and explained that the severe health issues and other health problems occurred. The assessee further informed that the assessee is duly covered two years with an order of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 Of 2020 date of order 10/01/2022 considering the Covid Pandemic. Accordingly, the delay was extended till 28.02.2022 by the order of Hon ble Apex Court. The ld. DR had not made any objection related to condonation petition. Accordingly, the delay of 740 days is condoned. 3. At the outset, all the appeals are under the same factual backdrop and have a common issue. All the appeals are taken together, heard together, and disposed of together. ITA No. 90/Asr/2022 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pur, Tehsil Balachaur, Distt Nawanshahr from Sh Jagtar Singh his wife Gurpreet Kaur, of Ropar by way of eight registered sale deeds executed in two years. It was alleged that in the above land deal, over and above the apparent consideration of Rs. 32.74.000/-. The assessees cases were reopened u/s 148 based on information supplied by ITO W-6(2), Ropar coupled with another letter received on 22.05.2003 followed by letter No. CIT(A)/Chd/2003-04/279 dated 5/7.8.2003. from CIT(A) Chandigarh to ITO Nawanshahr. intimating that Sh Surjit Singh and his son Navraj Singh had purchased 131 Kanals of agriculture land in village Kishanpur and it was alleged that in the above land deal, over and above the apparent consideration of Rs. 32.74.000/-. cash payments of Rs. 48.50 lacs were made by the assessees herein. The ld. AR has accepted the fact that during assessment of the seller Sh. Jagtar Singh, that the excess cash deposited in his bank accounts, was claimed to have been received from this assessee, which he supported with a few forged cash receipts bearing latter s signatures. Though the ITO did not believe the contention of Jagtar Singh and made addition of the said cash in his assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Singh, that the excess cash deposited in his bank accounts, was claimed to have been received from this assessee, which he supported with a few forged cash receipts bearing latter s signatures. Though the ITO did not believe the contention of Jagtar Singh and made addition of the said cash in his assessment, the Id.CIT(A) Chandigarh, deleted the addition, and thereafter, referred the matter to ITO Nawanshahr to reopen the cases of the buyers, the present appellants. c) Since the registered sale deeds for above land were executed in two years separately in favour of Surjit Singh Navraj Singh, three assessment orders were passed on 24.03.2005, two of Sh Surjit Singh and one of Sh Navraj Singh, making the impugned additions of cash paid in respective years, with some more additions made for other credits in bank accounts. Statements of a few witnesses were recorded by the ITO Nawanshar at assessee s back to justify the additions made. d) The first appeals preferred before the Id.CIT(A) Jalandhar, were substantially rejected but for some petty relief given, vide orders dated 15.06.2009 (copy at PB page 21-34). Assessee preferred second appeals before the Hon ble ITAT Am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roduced the order of Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court. The relevant para 9 10 of the order of appellate authority are inserted as below: 9. In pursuance of the directions of the Hon ble ITAT, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, Sh. Bal Kishan, Sh. Jit Singh and Sh. Parminderjit Singh, Advocate were summoned and examined afresh by my Ld. predecessor. During the set aside proceedings before me in the above cases, it transpired that the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court vide their order in ITA No.373 of 2006 dated 02.12.2010 (A.Y. 2000-01), has reversed the appellate order of the Ld. CIT(A), Chandigarh/Patiala (Appeal No.105/P/2001-02 dated 27.03.2002 and the Hon ble ITAT, Chandigarh (ITA No.507/Chandi/2002 dated 16.11.2005) for the A. Y. 2000-01 in the case of Sh. Jagtar Singh, on the basis of which I.T.O.. Nawanshahr has initiated assessment proceedings under reference. 10. The Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court has held (in the case of Sh. Jagtar Singh, (ITA No. 373 of 2006) as under:- The point for consideration in this appeal is, whether cash deposits which were found in the bank accounts of the assessee had been duty explained by him, or not, and the CIT(A) and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ged receipts, thus, could not be held to be substantiated by the assessee as relating to the sale of the land. However, the CIT(A) and the Tribunal wrongly placed the initial onus on the Revenue and had allowed the appeal of the assessee The approach of the CIT(A) and Tribunal cannot be accepted as the deposits which were credited in the accounts of the assessee had not been explained satisfactorily by the assessee, and, thus, it could not be held that the assessee had discharged the onus placed on him to show that it was his income from the sale of land. Once it is held that the onus was wrongly placed on the Department and the assessee had failed to produce any cogent and convincing material to establish that the deposits were on account of sale of land, the addition made by the assessing officer could not have been deleted and the fuming as recorded by him could not be held to be perverse. The CIT(A) and the Tribunal were, thus, not justified in reversing the finding of the assessing officer and thereby deleting the addition. In view of the above, the substantial question of law is, therefore, answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee, Accordingly, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
