The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Amritsar v. Parvesh Mahajan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: May 07, 2013 ITA No. 193 of 2012 (O&M) The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Amritsar …Appellant Versus Parvesh Mahajan …Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRIHON’BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Advocatefor the appellant. Ms. Radhika Suri, Advocatefor the respondent. 1To be referred to the Reporters or not?2Whether the Judgment should be reported in theDigest2Whether the Judgment should be reported in theDigest HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The present appeal under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') is directed against an orderpassed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench,Amritsar (for short 'the Tribunal') on 11.04.2012 for theassessment year 2007-08. The Revenue has claimed thefollowing substantial questions of law: i)Whether the ITAT was justified in reversing theorder of CIT (Appeals) wherein addition of Rs.53 lakhswas confirmed as unexplained investment forpurchase of land? ii)Whether the ITAT, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar isright in holding that the assessee has discharged heronus of proving the sources of Rs.53 lakhs when the documents relating Agreement Deed with SARStitchers Pvt. Ltd. were defective and that too wasagainst the statement of assessee recorded underSection 131 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?iii)Whether the ITAT, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar isright in holding that the assessee has discharged heronus of proving unexplained investment when theassessee had stated in her statement recorded u/s131 on 17.08.2009 that she had purchased land byraising a loan from M/s Shri Ram Chander Finance Co.Pathankot but at the end of proceedings on21.12.2009 she changed her stand stating that thefunds had been raised from M/s SAR Stitchers Pvt. Ltd.Delhi whereas the balance sheet of M/s SAR StitchersPvt. Ltd. Delhi shows closing balance of Rs. 6,58,644/-as cash balance as on 31.03.2007 and the sum of Rs.52 Lakhs received back is not reflected in theirstatements? The assessee filed her return of income declaringincome of `1,44,840 on 17.03.2008. Vide order dated22.12.2009, the income was assessed at `54,44,839/-. Theassessee filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals). Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) confirmed the addition of `53 lacs made by theAssessing Officer on account of unexplained investment forpurchase of land from Radha Swami Satsang Beas, Karan Ban,Jammu. However, in further appeal, the Tribunal has deleted theaddition as the assessee is said to have explained the sources forpurchase of land during the year in question. Learned Tribunal has found that a sum of `52 lacs was received from M/s SAR Stitchers Pvt. Ltd. Delhi on 05.01.2007.The Tribunal also noticed that `60 lacs was paid in cash to RadhaSwami Satsang Beas, Karan Ban, Jammu, which deposit finds ITA No.193 of 2012 (O&M) mention in the accounts of seller. The Tribunal has taken intoconsideration the record produced by the assessee in respect oftransaction entered with copy of confirmations, PAN number,Income tax particulars and audited accounts of the lendor. We find that the finding that the investment of `52 lacswas duly explained by the assessee, is a finding of fact and suchfinding of fact does not give rise to any substantial question oflaw. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. 07.05.2013Atul/Vimal (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE