Gomesh Dwivedi Vs ITO (ITAT Jabalpur)
ITAT Jabalpur held that addition towards unexplained investment without making adequate inquiry against co-owner regarding source of consideration for the purchase of agricultural land is not possible. Accordingly, matter restored for de novo consideration.
Facts-
The Department came into possession of information that the assessee had purchased agricultural lands during F.Y. 2011-12 but not shown this transaction in his ITR. Accordingly, proceedings u/s. 147 were initiated by issue of notice under section 148 on the grounds that the assessee had invested Rs.23,42,857/- in the part purchase of agricultural lands. As the assessee did not furnish any response to any notice issued by the AO, a sum of Rs. 23,42,857/- was added back to the income of the assessee in A.Y. 2012-13.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion-
Held that the sale deed does not indicate the shares of the respective parties and that large cash deposits have been made into the account of Sh. Dileep Kumar Rajwani, before the payment of the amounts made for the purchase of the land. It is also observed that the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. AO have pointed out, that Sh. Dileep Kumar Rajwani was not a regular taxpayer. Therefore, we are unable to understand, as to how the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A) could proceed against the assessee without first confronting these facts to Sh. Dileep Kumar Rajwani and recording his explanation on the matter. The payments having emanated out of the account of Sh. Dileep Kumar Rajwani, it is he who must explain the sources of such payments and his share in the property and also the share of the profits on the sale of the property. Further, it is, Sh. Dileep Kumar Rajwani who may explain as to why he had not filed returns despite having purportedly made an investment of Rs. 1.5 Crores and earned capital gains on his share of those properties. Without disproving the credentials of Sh. Dileep Kumar Rajwani, the addition against the assessee is not possible. Therefore, in the interest of justice to both parties, we restore these matters to the file of the ld. AO so that he may make further enquiries from Sh. Dileep Kumar Rajwani, in order to determine the source of the consideration for the purchase of the land and the extent of profits earned by him and the assessee on the sale of the land. As all matters stand restored to the file of the ld. AO for de novo consideration, both the appeals are held to be allowed for statistical purposes.
