Ita/181/2016 Of Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax Ludhiana v. Jagpreet Singh

I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDI GARH --I TA 181 2016 ( O&M) -Dat e of deci si on: 10. 05. 2017 Pr . Commi ssi oner of I ncome Tax- 2, Ludhi ana . . . Appel l ant ( s) Ver sus Jagpr eet Si ngh . . . Respondent--I TA 207 2016 ( O&M) Pr . Commi ssi oner of I ncome Tax- 2, Ludhi ana . . . Appel l ant ( s)Ver sus Amandeep Si ngh . . . Respondent CORAM: HON’ BLE MR. JUSTI CE S. J. VAZI FDAR, CHI EF JUSTI CEHON’ BLE MR. JUSTI CE ANUPI NDER SI NGH GREWAL Pr esent : -Mr . Zor a Si ngh Kl ar , Advocat e,f or t he appel l ant ( s) . Mr . Akshay Bhan, Seni or Advocat e,wi t h Mr . H. P. S. Sandhu, Advocat e,f or t he r espondent s.* * * * S. J. VAZI FDAR, C. J. ( ORAL) These t wo appeal s ar e under Sect i on 260 A of t heI ncome Tax Act , 1961 agai nst t he or der of t he Tr i bunal al l owi ngt he r espondent s’ / assessees’ appeal s agai nst t he or der of t heCI T ( Appeal s) conf i r mi ng t he Assessi ng Of f i cer ’ s or der .Themat t er s per t ai n t o t he assessment year 2010- 2011. 2.As we i nt end r emandi ng t he mat t er s, i t i s necessar yt o r ef er t o t he di sput es br i ef l y: - One Jaswant Si ngh and hi s son Rahul Sagar hadpur chased a pr oper t y i n t he year 2008.Jaswant Si ngh had a 75% i nt er est t her ei n and hi s son had a 25% i nt er est t her ei n. I nMar ch, 2010, t hey sol d t he pr oper t y t o t hr ee br ot her s.Two oft he br ot her s ar e t he r espondent s i n t he above appeal s. Anappeal has not been f i l ed agai nst t he t hi r d br ot her on t hegr ound of t ax ef f ect . Jaswant Si ngh and Rahul Sagar had f i l edan FI R al l egi ng t hat an amount of about` 2 cr or es i n cash wasst ol en f r om t hei r pr emi ses. Theyul t i mat el y al l egedl y st at edt hat t he cash was obt ai ned i n r espect of t he sal e of t hepr oper t y by t hem t o t he r espondent s her ei n and t o t he t hi r dbr ot her . I t i s i n vi ew of t hi s t hat pr oceedi ngs wer e i ni t i at edagai nst t he r espondent s/ assessees.The Assessi ng Of f i cer addedt he amount s i n pr opor t i on of t he shar es of t he r espondent s andt hei r br ot her t o t hei r r espect i ve i ncomes. 3.The or der of t he Tr i bunal not es t hat t he r espondent shad not been gi ven i nspect i on of cer t ai n document s especi al l yone of t he st at ement s made by Jaswant Si ngh and hi s bankst at ement s and t he books of account . The r espondent s f ur t heral l eged t hat t hey wer e not per mi t t ed t o cr oss- exami ne t hei rvendor s. The appel l ant son t he ot her hand cont end t hat t her espondent s and t hei rbr ot her r ef used t o avai l t he oppor t uni t yof cr oss- exami nat i on on t he gr ound t hat t hey had not been gi veni nspect i on of t he document s. 4.Consi der i ng t he f act s of t hese cases, t he mat t er sought not t or estby def aul t .I t i s necessar y f or t heaut hor i t i es t o consi der al l t he f act s and deci de t he mat t er onmer i t s.5.The appeal s ar e, t her ef or e, di sposed of by t hef ol l owi ng or der : -( i )The i mpugned or der and j udgement i s set asi de andr emanded t o t he Tr i bunal . I t wi l l be open t o t he Tr i bunal t odeci de t he mat t er i n such a manner as i t t hi nks f i ti ncl udi ng 5.The appeal s ar e, t her ef or e, di sposed of by t hef ol l owi ng or der : - by r emandi ng t he mat t er f ur t her , i f necessar y, especi al l y f ort he pur poses of adduci ng t he evi dence. 4.Consi der i ng t he f act s of t hese cases, t he mat t er sought not t or estby def aul t .I t i s necessar y f or t heaut hor i t i es t o consi der al l t he f act s and deci de t he mat t er onmer i t s.5.The appeal s ar e, t her ef or e, di sposed of by t hef ol l owi ng or der : -( i )The i mpugned or der and j udgement i s set asi de andr emanded t o t he Tr i bunal . I t wi l l be open t o t he Tr i bunal t odeci de t he mat t er i n such a manner as i t t hi nks f i ti ncl udi ng 5.The appeal s ar e, t her ef or e, di sposed of by t hef ol l owi ng or der : - by r emandi ng t he mat t er f ur t her , i f necessar y, especi al l y f ort he pur poses of adduci ng t he evi dence. ( i i )The r espondent s shal l on or bef or e 20. 05. 2017 i nf or mt he appel l ant s i n wr i t i ng t he document s t hat t hey desi r e. Theappel l ant s shal l r espond t o t he same i n wr i t i ng. I f any of t hedocument s ar e not avai l abl e wi t h t he appel l ant s,t heyshal lst at e so i n wr i t i ng. Needl ess t o add t hat i t wi l l be open t ot he r espondent s i n t hat event t o obt ai n t he document s i naccor dance wi t h l aw.The par t i es shal l t her eaf t er be af f or dedan oppor t uni t y of bei ng hear d and of cr oss- exami ni ng t her el evant wi t nesses. ( S. J. VAZI FDAR)CHI EF JUSTI CE ( ANUPI NDER SI NGH GREWAL)JUDGE 10. 05. 2017Amodh Whet her speaki ng/ r easonedYes/ NoWhet her r epor t abl eYes/ No