Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh
Manjit Kaur, Zirakpur vs Ito, W-3(5), Chandigarh on 6 November, 2019
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ, च डीगढ़ I N T H E I NC OM E T A X A P PEL L A TE T RI B U N AL C H A NDI G A RH B EN CH , ' SM C' , C H A N DI G A RH ी संजय गग , या यक सद य B E F OR E S H R I S A N J A Y G A R G, J U D I C I A L M E M B E R आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1 1 5 1 / C H D / 2 0 1 9 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Mrs. Manjit Kaur, Vs. The ITO,Ward-3(5), H. No.245, Lohgarh Road, बनाम Chandigarh Badal Colony, Baltana, Zirakpur थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO.ALUPK6307P अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Bharat Poplani, CA राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Manjit Singh, CIT DR सन ु वाई क तार%ख/Date of Hearing : 06.11.2019 उदघोषणा क तार%ख/Date of Pronouncement : 06.11.2019 आदे श/Order The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 10.6.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as 'CIT(A)'].
2. The assessee in this appeal has taken following grounds of appeal:-
1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) in Appeal No 10162/2017-18/A.Y.2010-11 has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs 11,00,000/- made by the Ld. A.O.
2. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the ITA No. 1151-CHD-2019-
Ms Manjit Kaur, Zirakpur 2 disallowance of Rs 2,00,000/- made by the Ld. AO on the ground that the vehicle was not owned by the assessee. The worthy CIT (A) while taking such stand conveniently ignored the fact that the vehicle was owned by the assessee's husband and such transactions as sale of vehicle by the husband and deposit of proceeds in the account of wife, son or daughter happens in the family.
3. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs 6,00,000/- made by the Ld. AO on the ground that confirmation letter issued by Sh. Sukhwinder Singh, holds no evidentiary value. While taking such stand the worthy CIT (A) conveniently outweighed the importance of the fact that Sh. Sukhwinder Singh is none other than the brother of the appellant assessee, who was taking care of the mother till her last breath. So any confirmation given by him in the absence of mother due to her death holds a significant evidentiary value.
4. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs 3,00,000/- made by the Ld. AO on the ground that the confirmation given by Smt. Kailash Kaur, the elder sister of the assessee, seems to be bogus. While taking such stand the worthy CIT(A) conveniently outweighs the importance of the affidavit filed in original to his office as an additional evidence.
5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in justifying the action of Ld. AO for passing the assessment order under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act'1961 despite the fact that the appellant assessee had no taxable income during the relevant assessment year so she was not required to file any Income Tax return for that year.
ITA No. 1151-CHD-2019- Ms Manjit Kaur, Zirakpur 3
6. That the proper opportunity and reasonable time has not been given to the appellant assessee to explain the genuineness of the sources while passing the impugned order.
3. A perusal of the above grounds reveal that the sole issue raised by the assessee in this appeal is against the confirmation of the addition of Rs. 11 lacs made into the income of the assessee on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee.
The assessee explained before the lower authorities that out of the amount of Rs. 11 lacs, Rs. 2 lacs was received from her husband, source of which was from the sale of vehicle (Tata Sumo). It was further claimed that the amount of Rs. 6 lacs was received by the assessee from her mother Smt. Labh Kaur, as gift, before her death. That Smt. Labh Kaur, mother of the assessee was no more in this world and that confirmation of affirmation of this fact was filed by the brother of the assessee namely Shri Sukhwinder Singh. Further, an amount of Rs. 3 lacs was obtained by the assessee from her sister namely Smt. Kailash Kaur, as gift. Both the lower authorities did not get satisfied by the above explanation furnished by the assessee. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had failed to prove with convincing evidence her averments, hence, he made the impugned additions. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) has given his findings in a chart against the respective addition made by the Assessing Officer, wherein, the Ld. CIT(A) has recorded the reasons for his dissatisfaction with the averments made by ITA No. 1151-CHD-2019- Ms Manjit Kaur, Zirakpur 4 the assessee. The said chart, as produced below para 6.4 of the impugned order of the CIT(A), is reproduced as under:-
Sr. No. Particulars Amount Remarks of Comments of the undersigned i.e. CIT(A) in lacs the Appellant 1 2 3 4 5
a) Sumo sold out 2.00 Photocopy of The appellant is not the owner of the Vehicle.
RC is attached. Rs,2,00,000/- was deposited on 27.04.2009. Merely filing copy of RC does not establish that the vehicle was sold. Date of sale is also not established with supporting evidence. AO has refuted to accept the confirmation from purchaser Sh. Bhaqwant Singh Gill. Moreover, appellant is not owner of the vehicle. The onus casted on appellant to explain source of Rs.2,00,000/- is not discharged.
Hence, source of cash deposit remains unexplained.
b) Gift by mother 6.00 Photocopy of Death certificate is dated 11.02.2009 which confirms Late Smt. Labh Death demise of Smt. Labh Kaur on 03.02.2009. Kaur and Certificate, CD Confirmation from Sh Sukhwinder Singh is dated Brother S. and a 18.09.2017. Smt. Labh Kaur is the sole owner of the Sukhwinder confirmation latter property which was sold to Sh.Gurmel Singh.
Singh Dhariwai are attached.
These facts clearly establish that confirmation from Sh.Sukhwinder Singh has no evidentiary value. Hence, source of cash deposit remains unexplained.
c) Loan from my 3.00 Photocopy of It is observed from the Bank Statement that cash has elder sister Smt. statement of been withdrawn on different dates. Cash deposits in Kailash Kaur account obtained the appellant's account is Rs.9,00,000/-on 16.04.2009, from Primary Rs.2,00,000/- on 27.04.2009, Rs.90,000/- on 09.09.2009 Coop. Bank and Rs.9,00,000/- on 18.09.2009. Smt. Kailash Kaur Ltd, Kurukshetra, has confirmed that she has taken loan from the Haryana & Kurukshetra Urban Co-op Bank Ltd amounting to confirmation letter Rs.5,00,000/- on 26.05.2009 and she has given are attached. Rs.4,50,000/- to her younger sister. When she has given this money, is not mentioned anywhere in the confirmation letter. Even if It is accepted that she after taking loan on 26.05.2009 has immediately given to the appellant the said amount but it is stark fact that it is only on 18.09.2009 when the appellant has deposited Rs.9,00,000/- by cash in her bank account. This is highly improbable that either of them kept money lying idle with her for about four months. This is highly misleading when appellant vide letter dated 21.09.2017 filed before the ITO during assessment proceedings has claimed that Rs.3,00,000/- has been obtained as Loan from her elder sister Smt. Kailash Kaur. Now strangely she has submitted confirmation of Rs.4,50,000/- obtained as Loan from Smt. Kailash Kaur. These facts clearly establish that the appellant has arranged bogus documents to explain the source of income.
Hence, source ol cash deposit remains unexplained.
Total 11.00
ITA No. 1151-CHD-2019-
Ms Manjit Kaur, Zirakpur
5
4. I have heard the rival contentions of the Ld. Authorized
Representatives of both the parties and gone through the record.
So far as the addition of Rs. 2 lacs is concerned, though the plea of the counsel of the assessee is that the same was received by her from her husband, the source of which in the hands of the husband is from the sale of Tata Sumo vehicle, however, no documents or record was produced regarding the sale of the said car except a confirmation of Shri Bhagwant Singh Gill, who happened to be a relative of the assessee. On being asked, the Ld. Counsel admitted that even as on today there is no evidence that the car was ever transferred in the name of Shri Bhagwant Singh Gill. Under the circumstances, the source of the above amount of Rs. 2 lacs has not been proved by the assessee, hence, the addition of Rs. 2 lacs made by the lower authorities is confirmed.
5. So far as the amount of Rs. 6 lacs alleged to have been received by the assessee from her mother during her last time is concerned, the assessee produced a copy of the sale deed on the file to show that Smt. Labh Kaur, mother of the assessee sold her land for a sum of Rs. 6 lac. The above plea of the assessee has been rejected by the Ld. CIT(A) observing that the land in question was sold by assessee's mother in the year 2006 and it was not plausible that she would have retained that money with her and gifted the same to the assessee in the year 2009 just before her death in the month of February 2009. The Ld. CIT(A) has further observed that since the gift was given by Smt. Labh Kaur, hence, ITA No. 1151-CHD-2019- Ms Manjit Kaur, Zirakpur 6 the confirmation by Shri Sukhwinder Singh, her son has no evidentiary value.
6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that mother of the assessee was an old aged lady and it is generally seen that the old aged village people do not have bank account and even they do not tend to deposit the amount in bank account. The said money was kept by her in cash and had gifted the same to her daughter immediately before her death. That Smt. Labh Kuar is no more in this world and, hence, it is not possible to file any confirmation from Smt. Labh Kaur. The only witness to the transaction was her son and brother of the assessee Shri Sukhwinder Singh, who has duly confirmed by way of affidavit of the above transaction of gift by his mother to the assessee.
7. Considering the above submissions and the fact that the assessee has duly established that Smt. Labh Kaur was possessed of amount of Rs. 6 lac and further that there was no evidence on the file that Smt. Labh Kaur had parted with the said money before her death or had deposited in any bank account, the plea taken by the assessee cannot be negated under the circumstances. Moreover, the transaction of gift has been confirmed by the son Smt. Labh Kaur who happens to be brother of the assessee.
ITA No. 1151-CHD-2019- Ms Manjit Kaur, Zirakpur 7 In view of this, the confirmation of addition of Rs. 6 lacs by the CIT(A) is not sustainable and the same is accordingly ordered to be deleted.
8. So far as the loan from her sister of Rs. 3 lacs is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) has given a categorical findings that a confirmation has been given of Rs. 4.5 lacs, whereas, the gift to the assessee has been shown of Rs. 3 lac. When asked to explain in this respect, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to para 4.3 of the written submissions, wherein, it has been pleaded that, in fact, apart from the above amount of Rs. 3 lacs, the assessee had also to receive Rs. 4.5 lacs from her sister, which in turn was received by her sister as loan from the bank. Though this amount of Rs. 4.5 lacs was not received by the assessee, however, the confirmation has been mistakenly filed. I do not find any convincing reply in the above submissions of the assessee. Rather, the facts on the file speak that the above said gift story or the loan story is a colorable device made by the assessee in connivance with her sister. It seems the assessee received the confirmation of Rs. 4.5 lacs finding that her sister could prove the source of the same being received as a loan from the bank, however, since there was no withdrawal from the bank of the said amount of Rs. 4.5 lacs, the said story of the assessee could not succeed. Hence, the story of gift of Rs. 3 lacs was made, however, no source of Rs. 3 lacs has been established even in the hands of the sister of the assessee namely Smt. Labh Kaur.
ITA No. 1151-CHD-2019- Ms Manjit Kaur, Zirakpur 8 In view of this, we do not find any merit in the above submissions of the assessee and the addition of Rs. 3 lacs made by the lower authorities in the hands of the assessee is confirmed.
In view of my findings given above, out of the total addition of Rs. 11 lacs, the addition of Rs. 5 lacs is confirmed and the balance addition of 6 lacs is ordered to be deleted.
The appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the Open Court immediately on completion of hearing.
Sd/-
(संजय गग / SANJAY GARG) या यक सद य/ Judicial Member Dated : 06. 11.2019 "आर.के."
आदे श क त,ल-प अ.े-षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent
3. आयकर आयु/त/ CIT
4. आयकर आयु/त (अपील)/ The CIT(A)
5. -वभागीय त न2ध, आयकर अपील%य आ2धकरण, च4डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
6. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदे शानस ु ार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar