LATE SH. RANJIT SINGH VAIDYA, Jaipur v. ACIT, Jaipur

ITA 1307/JPR/2010 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 130723114 RSA 2010
Bench Jaipur
Appeal Number ITA 1307/JPR/2010
Duration Of Justice 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant LATE SH. RANJIT SINGH VAIDYA, Jaipur
Respondent ACIT, Jaipur
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 28-07-2011
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 11-11-2010
Judgment Text
1 ITA 1307-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH B JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA AND SHRI N.L. KALRA ITA NO. 1307/JP/2010 ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-06. LATE RANJIT SINGH VAIDYA VS. THE ACIT CIRCLE-2 TH. L/H SMT.RATAN DEVI VAIDYA JAIPUR. 2454 BAHUJI KA CHOWK JOHARI BAZAR JAIPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI G.G. MUNDRA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VINOD JOHARI ORDER DATE OF ORDER : 28/07/2011. PER R.K. GUPTA J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS OBJECTING IN CONFIRMING THE ADDI TION OF RS. 5 35 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF LAND AT SI KAR ROAD AND AT AGRA ROAD. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE RECORDED BY LD. CIT (A) AT PAGE 2.1 AND 2.2 ARE AS UNDER :- 2.1. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT IN CONSEQU ENT TO SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION CARRIED ON 24.8.06 APPELLANT FILED RETUR N DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 13 11 393/- IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 153A AS AGAINST INCOME DECL ARED IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN AMOUNTING TO RS. 2 76 3932/-. THE APPELLANT IS DOING FINANCIA L BROKERAGE BUSINESS WHICH WAS 2 DETECTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. IT WAS NOTIC ED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH THAT APPELLANT HAS TAKEN OVER THE COMPANY NAMED M/S. NAC HIKETA AUTO INTERIOR PVT. LTD. FROM DIRECTOR NAMELY SH. INDER CHAND HARKAWAT AND SH. M ANISH HARKAWAT ALONGWITH ITS ONLY ASSETS 3.399 BIGHA LAND AT SIKAR ROAD AND RS. 4 LA KH WAS PAID BY CHEQUE. HOWEVER IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO.6 OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/ S 1`32(4) ON 24.8.06 THE APPELLANT STATED THAT APART FROM THE PAYMENT MADE BY CHEQUE RS. 7 LAKH WAS PAID IN CASH TO SH. INDER CHAND HARKAWAT FOR ACQUIRING THE COMPANY AND ITS LAND AT SIKAR ROAD. THIS PAYMENT OF RS. 7 LAKH WAS ADMITTED TO BE NOT RECORD ED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. AGAIN IN HIS STATEMENT DATED 31.8.06 THE APPELLANT REPEATE D HIS ADMISSION OF INVESTMENT OF RS. 7 LAKH AS PAYMENT FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES FOR TAKING OVER THE COMPANY. HOWEVER IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN UNDISCLOS ED INVESTMENT OF RS. 2 64 525/- BY CLAIMING THAT THE VALUE OF LAND AS PER DLC RATES CO MES TO RS. 6 64 525/- AND AS RS. 4 LAKH WAS PAID BY CHEQUE BALANCE AMOUNT RS. 2 64 525/- H AS BEEN DECLARED IN THE RETURN. THE AO ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICES AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATION OF THE APPELLANT HAS REJECTED THE CLAIM IN VIEW OF THE ADMITTED STATEME NT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND MOREOVER THAT THERE WAS NO IMMEDIATE RETRACTION FROM THE STATEMENT. THEREBY AO ADDED THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT OF RS. 4 35 000/-. 2.2. SIMILARLY IN RESPECT OF PURCHASE OF ANOTHER L AND NAMELY AT VILLAGE KANOTA AT AGRA ROAD THE APPELLANT HAS MADE PAYMENT BY CHE QUE OF RS. 4 LAKH BUT IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ON 2 4.8.06 THE APPELLANT STATED THAT RS. 5 LAKH WAS PAID IN CASH AS ON MONEY WHICH IS NOT REC ORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HOWEVER IN THE RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 153A THE APPELLANT HAD SHOWN UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT OF RS. 4 LAKH AND CLAIMED TH AT CERTAIN EXPENSES WERE INCURRED IN 3 RENOVATION OF THIS LAND AND RS.1 16 617/- HAS BEEN SURRENDERED ON THIS ACCOUNT IN A.Y. 2007-08. THE AO REJECTED THE ARGUMENT OF THE APPEL LANT AND ADDED THE DIFFERENCE OF RS. 1 LAKH. 4. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE LD. CIT (A) THAT IN RELA TION TO TAKING OVER OF THE COMPANY ALONGWITH ITS LAND AT SIKAR ROAD THE DLC RATE OF T HE LAND WAS FOUND TO BE RS. 6 64 525/- AND AS RS. 4 LAKH WAS PAID BY CHEQUE THE APPELLANT HAS RIGHTLY SUR4RENDERED RS. 2 64 525/-. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE AO TO DISBEL IEVE THE EVIDENCE AND TO MAKE FURTHER ADDITION. SIMILARLY IN RESPECT OF AGRA ROAD LAND AS PER THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS ITSELF CERTAIN EXPENSES WERE INCURRED FOR RENOVATION AND A CCORDINGLY RS. 1 16 617/- HAS BEEN SURRENDERED ON THIS ACCOUNT IN A.Y. 2007-08 AND THU S THE TOTAL SURRENDER TO THIS END IS MORE THAN RS. 5 LAKH. ACCORDINGLY IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO MAY BE DELETED. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS THE LD. CIT ( A) GAVE THE FOLLOWING FINDING :- 2.4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENT OF THE A.R. A ND HAVE PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND RELEVANT RECORD. ON CAREFUL PE RUSAL OF THE STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT RECORDED ON 24.8.06 IT IS EVIDENT THAT I N ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 6 HE HAS VERY CATEGORICALLY STATED IN SUB PARA (V) THAT APAR T FROM THE CHEQUE GIVEN FOR TAKING OVER OF THE COMPANY ALONGWITH ITS LAND RS.7 LAKH WAS GIVEN IN CASH TO SH. INDER CHAND HARKAWAT (DIRECTOR) AND THIS RS.7 LAKH ARE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. AFTER 7 DAYS THE STATEMENT OF THE APPE LLANT WAS AGAIN RECORDED ON 31.8.06. IN ANSWER TO QUESTION NO. 2 HE HAS VERY CA TEGORICALLY REITERATED THE CONTENTS OF HIS STATEMENTS DATED 24.8.06 AND FURTHE R ADMITTED THAT THE CASH PAYMENT FOR THE LAND OF SIKAR ROAD AND AGRA ROAD OF RS. 7 LAKH AND RS.5 LAKH RESPECTIVELY WAS MADE AND SAME IS NOT RECORDED IN T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HE OFFERED THE AMOUNT OF RS.12 LAKHS FOR TAXATION. IN VIEW OF THIS FACT THE ARGUMENT NOW TAKEN BY THE A.R. OF THE APPELLANT THAT DLC RAT E VALUATION MAY BE ADOPTED AND SAME IS GOOD PIECE OF EVIDENCE IS REJECTED IN VIEW OF THE CATEGORICAL 4 STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT NOT ONLY DURING THE COUR SE OF SEARCH BUT EVEN AFTER 7 DAYS OF SEARCH AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT G ENERALLY LAND IS TRANSFERRED AT A HIGHER RATE THAN THE DLC RATE. 2.5. IN RESPECT OF LAND TAKEN AT AGRA ROAD THE APP ELLANT MIGHT HAVE INCURRED THE EXPENSES FOR RENOVATION BUT THESE EXP ENSES ARE RELATED TO A.Y. 2007- 08. THESE EXPENSES WERE MADE AFTER THE PURCHASE OF LAND AND OBVIOUSLY WILL BE OVER AND ABOVE THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE LAND. AS R EGARDS THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE LAND AT AGRA ROAD IS CONCERNED THE APPELLANT I N HIS STATEMENT ON 24.8.06 HAS CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT HE HAS PAID RS.5 LAKH AS ON-MONEY IN CASH AND SAME IS NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE SAME STAT EMENT WAS REITERATED AFTER 7 DAYS I.E. ON 31.8.06. ACCORDINGLY THERE IS NO REAS ON FOR A.O. TO DISBELIEVE STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT. THE SUPPORT IS DERIVED FROM THE DECISION OF HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF V. KUNHAMBU AND SO NS V/S CIT 219 ITR 235. 2.6. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND LEGAL POSITION ON THE ISSUES UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ADD ITION OF RS.4 35 000/- AND RS.1 00 000/-MADE IN RESPECT OF TWO LAND BY THE A.O . IS JUSTIFIED AND IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. 6. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL HERE BEFORE THE TR IBUNAL. 7. THE LD. A/R REITERATED THE CONTENTION RAISED BEF ORE LOWER AUTHORITIES. A BRIEF NOTE WAS ALSO FILED. 8. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. D/R STRONGLY PLACED R ELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LD. D/R HAS ALSO FILED COPY OF STATEMEN T OF THE ASSESSEE RECORDED UNDER SECTION 132(4) ON 31.8.2006 BY WHICH IT WAS ADMITTE D BY HIM THAT HE HAS PAID RS. 7 LACS OVER AND ABOVE THE REGISTERED VALUE. 9. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND LD. C IT (A) AND THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE FINDING OF LD. CIT (A). THE LD. CIT (A) HAS GIVEN A DETAILED REASONING WHILE CONFIRMING THE ADDITION. HE HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE 5 STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE RECORDED DURING THE COURS E OF SEARCH AND THEREAFTER BY WHICH IT WAS ADMITTED BY HIM THAT A SUM OF RS. 7 LACS WAS GI VEN OVER AND ABOVE FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THESE FACTS HAVE BEEN CLEARLY ENUMERATED IN THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WHICH REMAINED UNCONTROVERTED. 10. THE LD. A/R HAS ALSO TAKEN AN ALTERNATE PLEA TH AT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CASH IN HAND WITH THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE SETTING OFF OF THE AM OUNT PAID IN CASH SHOULD BE ALLOWED. THIS ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO WITHOUT ANY W EIGHT AS NO SUCH ARGUMENT WAS TAKEN EITHER BEFORE THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OR BEFORE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. IT IS NOT KNOWN WHETHER THE AMOUNT WAS PAID OUT OF THE DISCLOSED CA SH BALANCE OR FROM THE AMOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THEREFORE ALTERNATE CONTENTION AT THIS POINT OF TIME IS NOT ACCEPTED. IN VIEW OF THE REASONING GIVEN BY LD. CIT (A) AND I N VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A). 11. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. 12. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 .7.2011. SD/- SD/- ( N.L. KALRA ) ( R.K. GUPTA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR D/- COPY FORWARDED TO :- LATE SHRI RANJIT SINGH VAIDYA THROUGH L/H SMT. RAT AN DEVI VAIDYA JAIPUR. THE ACIT CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR. THE CIT (A) THE CIT THE D/R GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 1307/JP/2010) BY ORDER AR ITAT JAIPUR. 6