Rajendra Sahu Vs ITO (ITAT Jabalpur)
Benami Allegation Entangled – Double Taxing the Same Investment Impermissible – ITAT Sends Benami Addition Back for Joint Decision -: Tribunal Orders Parallel Hearing with Employee’s Appeal
Assessee appealed against CIT(A)/NFAC order sustaining addition u/s 69 on alleged benami investment in immovable property. Reopening u/s 147 was initiated on the basis of Investigation Wing inputs & Benami Property Unit findings that Assessee had purchased land for Rs.1,18,95,000/- in the name of his employee, Sh. Amarnath Pyasi, who earned only Rs.8,000/- per month. AO noted that Pyasi’s statements u/s 131 on 29.03.2019 & 04.10.2019 confirmed he was taken to the registry office by Assessee, made to sign documents, had not paid any consideration & that his IDBI bank account was operated by Assessee. AO held that Rs.88,52,740/- paid during FY 2012-13 was unexplained investment u/s 69 r.w.s. 115BBE & added it substantively in Assessee’s hands.
Before CIT(A), Assessee contended that the real investor was Late Sh. Mukesh Agarwal, acting through his wife Smt. Parul Agarwal, who had issued account-payee cheques of Rs.38 lakh. Remaining payments were claimed to be from cash arranged by Agarwal. Assessee argued violation of natural justice as Investigation Wing statements, relied upon by AO, were not furnished nor was cross-examination permitted. CIT(A) held that reopening was valid, that Pyasi’s statements clearly implicated Assessee, & that circumstantial evidence (handling of Pyasi’s account, evasive replies of seller, lack of means of Parul Agarwal) established Assessee as the real investor. Appeal was dismissed.
