DHEER SINGH Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
LAWS(IT)-2014-5-93
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on May 30,2014

DHEER SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Respondents

JUDGEMENT

G.D.AGRAWAL,VP. - (1.) ITA Nos.3861/Del/2013, 3862/Del/2013 and 3863/Del/2013 : - These appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of learned CIT(A), Meerut dated 28th March, 2013 for the AY 1998 -99 to 2000 -01.
(2.) GROUND No.1 of the assessee's appeals in all the three years reads as under: - "That the ld.CIT(A) has erred in upholding the reassessment made by the AO u/s 147/148, which being invalid and untenable in law and on facts of the case be kindly cancelled."
(3.) WE have heard the arguments of both the sides and perused relevant material placed before us. The reasons recorded for reopening of assessment read as under: - "Dated 29.3.2005 Shri Dheer Singh 22 New Arya Nagar, Meerut. Assessee has filed return of income as per following details: - Asstt. Year 1998 -99 1999 -2000 2000 -2001 Income declared 2,10,000/ - 4,89,460/ - 5,49,480/ - Agricultural Income 2,50,000/ - 3,00,000/ - 4,50,000/ - Date of filing of 29 -11 -98 10 -03 -2000 30 -01 -2001 return Return was processed u/s 143(1). The assessee has shown agricultural income on estimated basis. The assessee was given a notice U/s 133 (6) dated 24 -03 -2005 to explain that the receipts and expenditure in relation of the agricultural income and produce the sales and bills of the agricultural produce sold in the above mentioned assessment years. The assessee vide his reply dated 28 -03 -2005 stated that the assessee has not maintained books of accounts in respect of agricultural income, the assessee has returned the agricultural income in later years on estimate basis by estimating the agricultural income at the rate of/in range of Rs.15,000/ - to Rs.20,000/ - per Bigha. The sale proceeds of agricultural produce are generally received in cash and not by cheques. The growing of sugar -cane, potato and other crops by the assessee on his agricultural lands stands established since assessment proceedings in respect of search related years. That the sales bills are not issued by the constituent parties buying the agricultural produce, it is not possible for the assessee to furnish the details of sales land bills for sales of agricultural produce. The reply of the assessee is not acceptable. It may be mentioned here that the search was conducted on assessee during A.Y. 1995 -96 and detailed queries about his agricultural operations and professional practice as well as various investments have been considered in details and depth in course of search and seizures proceedings. Assessee has not maintained accounts, in respect of agricultural operations and as such it is not possible to workout the income as Part IV of the Finance Act. Considering the above facts I have reason to believe that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of his agricultural income and to the extent indicated above, and to tax such escaped income action u/s 147 for the assessment are necessary. Whereas I have reason to believe that in respect of which agricultural income shown at Rs.2,50,000/ -, 3,00,000/ - and 4,50,000/ - chargeable to tax for the Asstt. Years 1998 -99, 1999 -2000 and 2000 -2001 respectively has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Issue notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly approval from Additional Commissioner of Income Tax/Commissioner of Income Tax is being taken. (Saroj Kumar Dubey) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1 Meerut" From the above, it is evident that the assessee had filed the return for AY 1998 -99 in December, 1998, for AY 1999 -2000 in March, 2000 and for AY 2001 -02 in January, 2001. No notice under Section 143(2) was issued and the income returned was accepted under Section 143(1). From the reasons recorded, it is found that in March 2005, i.e., much after the expiry of the period of limitation for issue of notice under Section 143(2), the Assessing Officer made enquiry with regard to the correctness of the agricultural income disclosed by the assessee in the return of income. Not being satisfied with the assessee's explanation with regard to agricultural income disclosed, he reopened the case by issuing notice under Section 148. That Section 143(2) reads as under: - "[(2) Where a return has been furnished under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub -section (1) of section 142, the Assessing Officer shall, - - (i) where he has reason to believe that any claim of loss, exemption, deduction, allowance or relief made in the return is inadmissible, serve on the assessee a notice specifying particulars of such claim of loss, exemption, deduction, allowance or relief and require him, on a date to be specified therein to produce, or cause to be produced, any evidence or particulars specified therein or on which the assessee may rely, in support of such claim: [Provided that no notice under this clause shall be served on the assessee on or after the 1st day of June, 2003;] (ii) notwithstanding anything contained in clause (i), if he considers it necessary or expedient to ensure that the assessee has not understated the income or has not computed excessive loss or has not under - paid the tax in any manner, serve on the assessee a notice requiring him, on a date to be specified therein, either to attend his office or to produce, or cause to be produced, any evidence on which the assessee may rely in support of the return: [Provided that no notice under clause (ii) shall be served on the assessee after the expiry of six months from the end of the financial year in which the return is furnished.]]." ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.