Smt. Anita Jain Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur)
ITAT Jaipur held that additions on account of LIC Premia treated as unexplained investment deleted as merely based on rough notings without any substantive evidence.
Facts-
The appeal has been filed by the assessees against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), dated 28-01-2022. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jaipur recognized the rough noting by the assessees as actual transactions and deletes additions on LIC Premium.
It is submitted that, the LIC Premium has been paid from drawings from Cash Funds and that the Assessing Officer (AO) has relied solely upon unsigned hand written notings which have neither been corroborated nor found from the possession or control of the assessee. Further, the various notings indicate that it’s a summary of LIC and other instruments of the various members of the joint family. The basis of how the AO has derived the alleged number for premia for a given Assessment Year has not been stated by the AO and in case the veracity of the said hand-written loose sheets of papers is suspect.
It is also contended that the AO/CIT has not brought any substantive material on record to establish that the appellants actually contributed any amount more than the number of drawings as submitted by the assessees and that the Orders of the AO and CIT are bad in law per se. The Counsels also submitted that the alleged “incriminating material” relied upon by the AO/CIT does not belong to the assessees and there is no corroborative evidence to establish that the assessees had any undisclosed incomes for the years under consideration. Thus, the impugned assessment orders are void ab initio having regard to settled law as the same are not emanating from any “incriminating” material. It is settled law that assessments u/s.153A of the Act should be confined to incriminating material only for years where the assessments have concluded and/or time limit for issue of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act has lapsed.
Conclusion-
In any case and also noted rightly by the Hon’ble ITSC, the said documents are merely rough scribblings. Accordingly, in the absence of any corroborative material brought on record by the Department in making the following specific additions in the case of the Appellants, the same are contrary to settled law and the order of the Hon’ble ITSC and hence deleted.
Held that accordingly, having regard to accepted facts for AY 2009-10 concerning cash balances available with the appellants and the absence of any substantive evidence brought on record by the AO/ CIT(A) that the rough notings relied upon were actual transactions carried out by the appellants, we delete the additions on account of LIC Premia treated as unexplained investment.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR
These appeals have been filed by the above mentioned assessees against three different orders of ld. CIT(A)-4, Jaipur dated 28-01-2022 for the assessment years mentioned hereinabove. The grounds of appeals raised by the different assessees are as under:-
Anita Jain (A.Y. 2010-11 to 2016-17)
2.1 In the case of Smt. Anita Jain for the A.Y. 2010-11 to 2016-17, the ground No. 1 is common which is as under:-
1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order dated 28-01-2022 passed u/s 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 by CIT(A) confirming the order dated 30-12-2017 passed by the AO is bad in law.
2.2 In the case of Smt. Anita Jain for the A.Y. 2010-11 to 2016-17, the ground No. 2 is common but amount of confirming addition u/s 68 and confirming the part addition on account unexplained investment by the ld. CIT (A) are different which is mentioned as under:-
