Manoj Ghanshyam Kabra, Pune v. Tax Recovery Officer, Pune

ITA 1424/PUN/2012 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2013 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 142424514 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AVFPK8933N
Bench Pune
Appeal Number ITA 1424/PUN/2012
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant Manoj Ghanshyam Kabra, Pune
Respondent Tax Recovery Officer, Pune
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 31-10-2013
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 25-06-2012
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1424/PN/2012 (ASSTT.YEAR : 2008-09) MANOJ GHANSHYAM KABRA FLAT NO.5 SHUBANKAR APARTMENTS LEFT BHUSARI COLONY KOTHRUD PUNE-411038. .. APPELLANT PAN NO.AVFPK 8933N VS. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER RANGE-3 PUNE .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUNIL GANOO RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.L. PATHADE DATE OF HEARING : 18-10-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31-10-2013 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 28-12-2011 OF THE CIT(A)-II PUNE RELATING TO ASSES SMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER : 1. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED C.I.T.[A] HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPELLAN T AND HIS FRIEND MR. UDAY YADWAD HAVE JOINTLY PURCHASED FLAT IN RUNWAL PRISTIN AT KOTHRUD PUNE AND THEREFORE EACH OF THEM HAD RIGHT TITLE INTERE ST SHARE AND CLAIM IN THE SAID FLAT IN THE PERCENTAGE IN WHICH THE PURCHASE CON SIDERATION WAS CONTRIBUTED BY THEM. IT MAY PLEASE BE HELD THAT THE APPELLANT HAD 69.42 % SHARE IN THE SAID FLAT AND MR.UDAY YADWAD HAD 30.58 % SHARE IN THE SAID FLAT ON THE BASIS OF AMOUNT CONTRIBUTED BY THEM FOR PURCHASE OF SAID FLAT. 2. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LA W THE LEARNED C.I.T.[A] HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1 94 170.00 AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS ON SALE OF FLAT BY THE APPELLANT D URING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IT MAY PLEASE BE HELD THAT THE SHORT T ERM CAPITAL GAINS ON SALE OF THE FLAT WORK OUT TO RS.30 650.00 AND 69.42% OF THE SAME I.E.RS.21 277.23 ARE REQUIRED TO BE TAXED IN THE HA NDS OF THE APPELLANT AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS. 2 3. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LA W THE LEARNED C.I.T.[A] HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 31 69 350.00 MADE BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 69 OF THE I.T. ACT 19 61 BEING THE ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT MADE BY THE APPELLANT IN PURC HASE OF THE FLAT. THE IMPUGNED ADDITION BEING ARBITRARY PERVERSE AND DEVOID OF MERITS AND BEING LEGALLY UNSUSTAINABLE THE SAME MAY PLEASE B E DELETED. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE PERMISSION TO ADD AMEND MODIFY/ALTER REVISE SUBSTITUTE DELETE ANY OR ALL GROUNDS OF APPEA L IF DEEMED NECESSARY AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND PROPRIETOR OF M/S. GAJANAN ENTERPRISES WHICH CARRIE S ON THE ACTIVITY OF SUPPLY OF BUILDING MATERIAL AND LABOUR. THE ASSESS EE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 11-05-2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1 22 573/-. IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD THE AIR INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO THE TRANSACTION REGARDING IMMOVABLE PROPERTY OF RS.30 L AKHS AND ABOVE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED ANY DETAILS REGARD ING THE PURCHASE OF SALE OF PROPERTY IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER THERE WAS P ERSISTENT NON- COMPLIANCE. SUBSEQUENTLY IT WAS SUBMITTED ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HE HAS PURCHASED A FLAT JOINTLY WITH SRI UDAY SHRIP AD YADWAD DURING MAY 2007 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.30 05 830/- FROM RUN WAL MULTI HOUSING PVT. LTD. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE BREAK-UP OF THE A MOUNT PAID TO THE SAME WHICH IS AS UNDER : AMOUNT CHEQUE NO. DATE PAID BY 51 000 78280 01-04-2007 UDAY YADWAD 7 54 830 727265 18-05-2007 UDAY YADWAD 11 00 000 170607 18-05-2007 LOAN RAMPRASAD M. DARAKH 4 00 000 264267 15-06-2007 LOAN R.P. BANBARE 7 00 000 264266 18-05-2007 LOAN R.P. BANBARE 30 05 830 1 32 900 STAMP DUTY 30 620 REGISTRATION 31 69 350 3 3.1 THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO CLA RIFY THE SHARE OF BOTH THE PERSONS I.E. THE ASSESSEE AND SRI UDAY SH RIPAD YADWAD AND THE SHARE OF PROFIT/LOSS AS AND WHEN THE PROPERTY WILL BE SOLD. HOWEVER NO REPLY WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THIS QUERY. 3.2 AS REGARDS THE CAPACITY OF THE PERSONS WHO HAD GIVEN THE MONEY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH CON FIRMATION LETTER CONTAINING NAME AND ADDRESS PAN NO. AND WHETHER TH E PERSON IS ASSESSED TO TAX ETC. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED THE CON FIRMATION LETTERS WHICH DID NOT CONTAIN THE REQUISITE DETAILS. THEREFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER GAVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE WHO ATTEN DED AND FILED FURTHER INFORMATION WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DUE TO DEFICIENCY. SINCE THE AMOUNTS WERE DEPOSITED IN TH E BANK ACCOUNT WHICH IS PRIOR TO GIVING OF THE LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE AND SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE DEPOSIT THE ASSE SSING OFFICER REJECTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS SOURCE OF T HE INVESTMENT AND MADE ADDITION OF RS.30 05 830/- AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMEN T IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER NOTED THAT THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN SOLD ON 24-08-2007 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.32 LAK HS AND THEREBY THERE WAS PROFIT OF RS.1 94 170/- WHICH HE TREATED AS SHO RT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER MADE ADDITION OF RS.1 63 520/- BEING THE STAMP DUTY AND REGISTRATION EXPENSES PAID TOWARDS T HE PURCHASE OF THE FLAT AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT FOR PURCHASE OF THE PROPE RTY. 4. BEFORE THE CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAD TAKEN LOAN FROM HIS FAMILY MEMBER AND ONE OF HIS FRIENDS FOR P URCHASE OF THE SAID RESIDENTIAL HOUSE PROPERTY BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE. THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH JOINT OWNER SRI UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD DECIDED TO SELL THE PROPERTY 4 IMMEDIATELY WITHIN 2 MONTHS AFTER ITS PURCHASE TO M EET THE REQUIREMENT OF HOSPITALISATION OF THE MOTHER-IN-LAW OF THE ASSESSE E. SRI R.P. BANBARE AND SRI RAMPRASAD DARAKH WERE REPAID IMMEDIATELY AFTER SALE OF THE PROPERTY THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER : 4.1 IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ALTHOUGH THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM THE LOAN CREDITORS I.E. R.P. BANBARE AND RAMPRASAD DAR AKH WERE SUBMITTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALONG WITH THEIR PAN NO. AND BANK ACCOUNT EXTRACTS HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISREGARDE D THE SAME AND MADE THE ENTIRE ADDITION AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS JOINTLY OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE AS W ELL AS SRI UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIF IED IN MAKING THE ENTIRE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WA S SUBMITTED THAT IF THE SHARE IN PROPERTY IS NOT DEFINED IT SHOULD BE CONSI DERED AS EQUAL. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCH ARGED THE INITIAL ONUS CAST ON HIM IT WAS THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO SHOULD HAVE DISPROVED THE SAME BY ISSUING LETTERS TO THE CREDITORS ASKING THE M TO CONFIRM THE CREDITS IN WRITING. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS APPROACHED ALL CREDITORS AFTER LAST HEARING AND REQUESTED THEM TO PROVIDE THEIR I.T. RETURN COPY TO BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE CIT(A). HOWEVER THE CREDITORS DENIED TO PROVIDE ANY FURTHER DETAILS AND SHOWN THEIR UNWILLI NGNESS TO PROVIDE REQUISITE DETAILS TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTE D THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ALL POSSIBLE DOCUMENTS AND DETAILS TO PRO VE THE GENUINENESS OF THE LOAN AND SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS IGNORE D ALL THE FACTS AND DID DATE AMOUNT CHEQUE NO. PAID TO 04-09-2007 7 00 000/- 901572 R.P. BANBARE 04-09-2007 4 00 000/- 901573 R.P. BANBARE 25-10-2007 9 80 000/- TRANSFER RAMPRASAD M. DARAKH TOTAL 20 80 000/- 5 NOT ISSUE ANY LETTER TO THE CREDITORS ASKING THEM T O CONFIRM THE CREDITS IN WRITING THEREFORE IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDIT ION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD BE DELETED. 5. HOWEVER THE LD.CIT(A) WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH TH E EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WHILE DOING SO HE NOTED THAT DESPITE BEI NG GIVEN AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE INVESTME NT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS PURCHASE OF THE FLAT THE ASSESSEE INITIALL Y AVOIDED IN GIVING THE DETAILS. SUBSEQUENTLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE FILED CER TAIN DETAILS TOWARDS THE SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENT MADE IN THE PURCHASE OF TH E FLAT HOWEVER SAME HAS NOT BEEN SUPPORTED WITH PROPER PROOF AND EVIDEN CES. THE LOAN CONFIRMATIONS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE LACKED THE B ASIC DETAILS FROM WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER COULD HAVE CARRIED FURT HER VERIFICATION AND ENQUIRY SO THAT THE SAME COULD BE ACCEPTED. MOREOV ER THE EXTRACTS OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS ALSO REVEAL THAT CASH DEPOSITS WERE M ADE JUST PRIOR TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF LOANS WHICH CREATED A SERIOUS DOUBT WITH RESPECT TO THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS MADE. HE NOTED THA T EVEN DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE OR DETAILS TO JUSTIFY THE CLAIM MADE WITH RESPECT TO THE SOURC E OF INVESTMENT. RELYING ON VARIOUS DECISIONS THE LD.CIT(A) HELD THA T THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY HELD THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT M ADE IN THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY AND WAS JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. 5.1 AS REGARDS THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT TER M CAPITAL GAIN AND ADDITION TOWARDS STAMP DUTY AND REGISTRATION EXPENS ES AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT HE UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER IN ABSENCE OF ANY SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. 6 5.2 AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE ASS ESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRING TO PA GE 57 OF THE PAPER BOOK SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE VIDE ITS LETTER SU BMITTED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 30-12-2010 HAD FURNISHED THE FOLLOWING D ETAILS : (I) BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31-03-2008 (II) PROFIT & LOSS A/C. FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31-03-200 8 (III) COMPUTATION SHEET (IV) LETTER OF AUTHORITY (V) LOAN CONFIRMATION STATEMENTS FROM MR. R.P. BANBAR E R.M. DARAKH MR. UDAY YADWAD. (VI) SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN HOUSE PROPERTY (VII) BANK A/C. EXTRACTS OF MR. R.P. BANBARE & MR. R .M. DARAKH (VIII) LEDGER ABSTRACT FROM AMRUT RUNWAL MULTI HSG. P VT. LTD. (IX) SALE & PURCHASE AGREEMENT OF FLAT. 6.1 REFERRING TO PROVISIONS OF SECTION 45 OF THE TR ANSFER OF THE PROPERTY ACT THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DREW THE ATTEN TION OF THE BENCH TO THE FOLLOWING: 45. JOINT TRANSFER FOR CONSIDERATION WHERE IMMOVA BLE PROPERTY IS TRANSFERRED FOR CONSIDERATION TO TWO OR MORE PERSONS AN D SUCH CONSIDERATION IS PAID OUT OF A FUND BELONGING TO THEM IN COMMON THEY ARE IN THE ABSENCE OF A CONTRACT TO THE CONTRARY RESPECT IVELY ENTITLED TO INTERESTS IN SUCH PROPERTY IDENTICAL AS NEARLY AS MAY B E WITH THE INTERESTS TO WHICH THEY WERE RESPECTIVELY ENTITLED IN THE FUND ; AND WHERE SUCH CONSIDERATION IS PAID OUT OF SEPARATE FUNDS BELONGING T O THEM RESPECTIVELY THEY ARE IN THE ABSENCE OF A CONTRACT TO THE CONTR ACT RESPECTIVELY ENTITLED TO INTERESTS IN SUCH PROPERTY IN PROPORTION TO THE SHAR ES OF THE CONSIDERATION WHICH THEY HAVE RESPECTIVELY ADVANCED. IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE AS TO THE INTERESTS IN THE F UND TO WHICH THEY WERE RESPECTIVELY ENTITLED OR AS TO THE SHARES W HICH THEY RESPECTIVELY ADVANCED SUCH PERSONS SHALL BE PRESUMED TO BE EQUALLY I NTERESTED IN THE PROPERTY. 6.2 REFERRING TO PAGE 11 OF THE PAPER BOOK THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DREW THE ATTENTION OF THE BENCH TO THE COP Y OF THE SALE DEED BY WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THE FLAT FROM RUNW AL MULTI HOUSING PVT. LTD. ALONG WITH SRI UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD. HE S UBMITTED THAT SRI 7 UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD HAS BEEN NAMED AS THE NO.1 PURC HASER AND THE ASSESSEES NAME STANDS IN THE NO.2. HE SUBMITTED T HAT WHEN THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN PURCHASED JOINTLY BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS HIS FRIEND SRI UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD AND WHEN FULL DETAILS REGARDING SOUR CE OF INVESTMENT WAS EXPLAINED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREFORE THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEX PLAINED INVESTMENT THAT TOO THE ENTIRE AMOUNT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. HE HOWEVER SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO OBJECTION FOR TAXING PRO PORTIONATE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE OTHER HAND HEAVILY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVED CONCLUSIVELY THE GENUINENESS AND CREDIT WORT HINESS OF THE LOAN CREDITORS. FURTHER CASH DEPOSITS WERE MADE WHICH IS JUST BEFORE THE LOAN WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTA NCES THE LD.CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY B OTH THE SIDES PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A) AND THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE VARIOUS DECISIONS CITED BY BOTH THE SIDES. WE FIND THE FLA T HAS BEEN PURCHASED FROM RUNWAL MULTI HOUSING PVT. LTD. BY AN AGREEMENT TO SALE DEED DATED 17-05-2007 BY SRI UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR G. KABRA. HOWEVER WE FIND THE ASSESSEE IN HIS REPLY TO THE A SSESSING OFFICER HAS MENTIONED THE LOAN CONFIRMATION STATEMENT FROM SRI R.P. BANBARE AND SRI RAMPRASAD DARAKH AND SRI UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD. FROM THE VARIOUS DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PAPER BOOK WE FIND THE LOAN CREDITOR SRI R.P. BANBARE HAS NOT GIVEN HIS PAN NO. NOR ANY DETAILS 8 REGARDING FILING OF THE RETURN HAS BEEN FURNISHED. SIMILAR IS THE CASE WITH SRI RAMPRASAD DARAKH. IN OUR OPINION MERE GIVING OF AMOUNT BY CHEQUE AND FILING OF THE BANK STATEMENT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THE CREDIT WORTHINESS OF A LOAN CREDITOR WITHOUT GIVING THE PA N DETAILS AND THE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ETC SO AS TO ENABLE THE AO TO TAKE ANY VIEW. IN THIS CASE ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED TO HAVE SUBMITTED THE PAN DETAILS HOWEVER THERE IS NO SUCH DETAILS FROM THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF MR. R.P. BANBAR E AND R.M. DARAKH. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY WE REPRODUCE THE CONFIRMATI ON LETTERS OF THE ABOVE 2 PERSONS WHICH READ AS UNDER : DECEMBER 29 2010 TO MRS. K.D. KAPURE THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICER SWARGATE PUNE. DEAR MADAM I R.P. BANBARE HEREBY CONFIRM THAT I HAVE MADE FO LLOWING PAYMENTS TO RUNWAL MULTI HOUSING PVT. LTD. FOR PURCHA SE OF RESIDENTIAL FLAT NO.5 PRISTINE BUILDING KOTHRUD PUNE ON BEHA LF OF MR. MANOJ G. KABRA. THE SAME IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE SAID RUNWAL MU LTI HOUSING PVT. LTD. ALSO VIDE R.NO.3965 & 3966. DATE OF PAYMENT CHEQUE NO. AMOUNT PAID R.NO. 15-06-2007 264267 400000 3965 18-05-2007 264266 700000 3966 I ALSO CONFIRM THAT I HAVE RECEIVED THE MONEY BACK F ROM MR. MANOJ G. KABRA AS BELOW : DATE OF RECEIPT CHEQUE NO. AMOUNT PAID 04-09-2007 901572 700000 04-09-2007 901573 400000 YOURS TRULY SD/- R.P. BANBARE 9 DECEMBER 29 2010 TO MRS. K.D. KAPURE THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICER SWARGATE PUNE. DEAR MADAM I RAMPRASAD M. DARAKH HEREBY CONFIRM THAT I HAVE M ADE PAYMENT OF RS.11 00 000 TO RUNWAL MULTI HOUSING PVT. LTD. VID E CHEQUE NO.170607 DATED 18-05-2007 ON BEHALF OF MY SON-IN-LAW MR. MAN OJ G. KABRA FOR PURCHASE OF RESIDENTIAL FLAT NO.5 PRISTINE BUILDING KOTHRUD PUNE. I ALSO CONFIRMED THAT I HAVE RECEIVED RS.9 80 000 BACK FROM MR. MANOJ G. KABRA ON 25-10-2007 BY BANK TRANSFER. I ALSO CONFIRM THAT I HAVE NO CLAIM ON THE SAID MONEY AS ON TODAY. YOURS TRULY SD/- RAMPRASAD M. DARAKH FROM THE ABOVE IT IS CLEAR THAT NO PAN DETAILS WER E GIVEN. 8.1 AT THE SAME TIME WE FIND ALTHOUGH SRI UDAY SHR IPAD YADWAD HAD FILED A CONFIRMATION LETTER GIVING HIS PAN NO. AS W ELL AS STATING THAT HE IS THE JOINT HOLDER OF THE PROPERTY WE FIND THE ASSES SING OFFICER HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE SAME. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY WE R EPRODUCE THE CONFIRMATION LETTER FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFI CER WHICH READ AS UNDER: DECEMBER 29 2010 TO MRS. K.D. KAPURE THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER INCOME TAX OFFICER SWARGATE PUNE. DEAR MADAM I UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD PAN : ABWPY9296M HEREBY CO NFIRM THAT I HAVE MADE FOLLOWING PAYMENTS TO RUNWAL MULTI HOUSIN G PVT. LTD. FOR PURCHASE OF RESIDENTIAL FLAT NO.5 PRISTINE BUILDING KOTHRUD PUNE IN JOINT NAME WITH MR. MANOJ G. KABRA. THE SSAME IS ACKNOWLED GED BY THE SAID RUNWAL MULTI HOUSING PVT. LTD. ALSO VIDE R.NO.3939 & 3967. DATE OF PAYMENT CHEQUE NO. AMOUNT PAID R.NO. 01-04-2007 728280 51000 3939 18-05-2007 727265 754830 3967 10 YOURS TRULY SD/- UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD 8.2 WE FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT WHEN THE HOUSE PROPERTY HAS BEEN PURCHASED JOI NTLY BY 2 PERSONS ADDITION OF THE ENTIRE AMOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED INVEST MENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT JUSTIFIED. SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT PROPERLY HAS BEEN PURCHASE D JOINTLY BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS SHRI UDAY SHRIPAD YADWAD AND SI NCE THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT PROVED THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT PROPERTY B EFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY GIVING THE REQUISITE DETAILS THEREFORE CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUS TICE WE DEEM IT PROPER TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFI CER WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT OF THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS HIS SHARE OF INV ESTMENT IN PROPERTY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISS UE AFRESH AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 9. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31-10-2013. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE DATED : 31 ST OCTOBER 2013 SATISH 11 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE DEPARTMENT 3. THE CIT(A)-II PUNE 4. THE CIT-II PUNE 5. D.R. A BENCH PUNE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE