Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Ravinder Kumar Sarine, New Delhi vs Assessee on 28 November, 2014
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH 'F
'F' : NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND
SHRI I.C. SUDHIR,
SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.
No.1534/Del/2012
Assessment Year : 2003-
2003-04
Shri Ravinder Kumar Sarine, Vs. Deputy Commissioner of
The Bahar, Income Tax,
37, Deramandi Road, Circle-
Circle-2(1),
New Delhi - 110 074. New Delhi.
PAN : AARPS5715M.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Anil Kumar Malhotra, CA.
Respondent by : Shri Vikram Sahay, Sr.DR.
ORDER
PER G.D. AGRAWAL, AGRAWAL, VP :
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-V, New Delhi dated 28th February, 2012 for the AY 2003-
04.
2. The only ground raised by the assessee in this appeal reads as under:-
"1. Grounds of Appeal No.1 Addition of Rs.30,00,000/- on account of undisclosed cash/income as income from undisclosed sources The ld.A.O. has erred in law and on facts in treating the unsigned, unregistered agreement to sell as valid agreement thereby treating the cash content (as stated in agreement) as cash paid by the assessee without there being any corroboration from the receiving party. The addition is an absolute assumption and is prayed to be deleted in full."
3. At the time of hearing before us, it is submitted by the learned counsel that at the time of survey of the premises of M/s Auto Ignition Ltd., an unsigned agreement between Shri Pardeep Gambhir and the 2 ITA-1534/Del/2012 assessee was found. The agreement was with regard to plot bearing No.94, Arjun Marg, Gurgaon. He stated that the agreement found was only the draft agreement which was never acted upon because the agreement is not signed by any of the parties and moreover, the cheques mentioned in the agreement were also not given but were cancelled. When the agreement to sell of the property was not executed upon, the question of any cash payment does not arise. He, therefore, submitted that the addition made by the Assessing Officer for unexplained cash of `30 lakhs is uncalled for. The same should be deleted.
4. Learned DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of authorities below.
5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused relevant material placed before us. The Assessing Officer, after considering all the facts of the case and the assessee's explanation, had concluded as under:-
"5.3 It can be derived from the agreement and facts and circumstances of the case, that the deal some how not materialized and the agreement was not signed and the cheques were returned. But, the agreement is supported by presence of cancelled cheques and thus existence of cash of Rs.30 lacs in the hands of assessee on the date of 25/04/2002 (Date of signed cheques by assessee & agreements month & year) has been proved beyond doubt. Assessee has not disclosed the source of the same. Even the agreement was impounded from assessee's office at the business premises of M/s Auto Ignition Ltd., which only assessee can explain. Assessee has not discharged his onus. Assessee is just in denial mode without any supporting evidences.
In view of the same Rs.30 lacs represents undisclosed cash/income of assessee during the assessment year under consideration from undisclosed sources and added to his taxable income."
3 ITA-1534/Del/2012
6. From the above, it is evident that the Assessing Officer agreed that the deal somehow could not materialize and the agreement was not signed and cheques were returned. He, however, presumed that there was a sum of `30 lakhs with the assessee as on 25.04.2002 which was unaccounted cash/income of the assessee. In our opinion, the above finding of the Assessing Officer is purely based on presumption and suspicion. When the agreement is not materialized, the question of any unexplained investment by the assessee does not arise. Whether the assessee has unaccounted cash or not, it is only a matter of presumption. There is no evidence of any unexplained cash with the assessee. During the course of survey of the business premises, no accounted cash belonging to the assessee was found. Merely because some draft agreement was prepared as per which assessee was supposed to pay some unaccounted cash, it does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that assessee had unaccounted cash. May be that the deal did not materialize because the assessee did not have unaccounted cash. Whatever happened, we cannot say conclusively but the fact remains that there is no evidence of any unexplained investment by the assessee or availability of unexplained cash with the assessee. Therefore, the addition which is based purely on the presumption or the guess work cannot be sustained. The same is deleted.
7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Decision pronounced in the open Court on 28th November, 2014.
Sd/- Sd/-
(I.C. SUDHIR)
SUDHIR) (G.D. AGRAWAL)
AGRAWAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
Dated : 28.11.2014
VK.
4 ITA-1534/Del/2012
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant : Shri Ravinder Kumar Sarine,
The Bahar, 37, Deramandi Road,
New Delhi - 110 074.
2. Respondent : Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-
Circle-2(1), New Delhi.
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar