IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-2 , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 988/DEL/2015 A.Y. : 2001-02 MS. USHA NAGAR, ITO, WARD-4, VILL.-MUFAD (NAWADA) VS. AAYKAR BHAWAN POST-DANKAUR, GREATER NOIDA, A-2D, SECTOR-24, G.B. NAGAR, UP NOIDA-201301 (PAN: AEJPN9465P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Smt. Usha Nagar (herself) Department by : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08-09-2016 Date of Order : 04-10-2016 ORDER This appeal by Assessee is directed against Order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Noida, dated 22.11.2014 pertaining to assessment year 2001-02. 2. grounds of appeal read as under:- 1. That assessment order of ACIT is bad in law and on facts of case. 2. That AO has erred in ignoring facts that Assessee has presented parties from whom cash were received, for verification of transaction of cash deposited in Bank Account before AO. 1 3. That assessee reserve right to add and revise grounds of appeal at time of hearing of appeal. 3. brief facts of case are that assessee has deposited Rs. 12,98,800/- in cash in her bank account but was not filing her return of income. Therefore, AO issued notice u/s. 148 of I.T. Act to assessee to assess income which has escaped assessment. In response thereto, assessee filed her return of income on 02.3.2006 declaring NIL income. However, during assessment proceedings AO found that assessee, even after being given reasonable opportunity, could not furnish supporting evidence in respect of cash amounting to Rs. 12,98,800/- found deposited in her bank account. Accordingly, AO treated said cash credit in her bank account as unexplained and assessed income of assessee at Rs. 12,98,800/- vide his order dated 28.12.2006 passed u/s. 144/147 of I.T. Act, 1961. 4. Aggrieved with aforesaid assessment order, assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned Order 22.11.2014 has dismissed appeal of Assessee by upholding action of Assessing Officer. 5. At time of hearing, Ms. Usha Nagar (the assessee) has stated that she is Very poor lady and she received money in cash as advance from Sh. Ravinder Bhati against sale of agricultural land on behalf of her father Sh. Pritam Singh which she deposited in her bank under belief that this amount is not taxable. She further stated that 2 since deal was not materialized and accordingly, Mr. Ravinder Bhati has taken his money back which should not be taxed in hands of assessee. She further stated that if any addition is required, it should be made in hands of Sh. Ravinder Bhati. Hence, she requested that addition in dispute may be deleted. 6. On other hand, Ld. DR relied upon orders of authorities below and opposed request of Assessee. 7. I have heard both parties and perused orders passed by Revenue Authorities alongwith relevant records available with us. In this case, assessment relating to A.Y. 2001-02 was completed u/s. 144/147 of IT Act 1961, on total income of Rs.12,98,000/- as against NIL returned income ( as per ITR filed in compliance with notice U/s 148) after making addition of Rs.12,98,800/- on account of cash deposits in S/B account, and Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeal) in his appellate proceedings confirmed Assessing Officer's action. I note that in this case assessee received money as advance from Sh. Ravinder Bhati against sale of agricultural land on behalf of her father Shri Pritam Singh and Assessee under bonafide belief that cash amount deposited in bank, which was received from Sh. Ravinder Bhati, against sale agreement of agricultural land, was not taxable. Sh. Ravinder Bhati in his statement on oath before Assessing Officer stated that he had given Rs. 13,25,000/- to Assessee for purchase of Agricultural land of her father and since sale was not finalized he received back 3 entire amount. However, AO has admitted in his order vide Para 2(i) at page 2 of his assessment order that Shri Ravinder Bhati who purchased land of her father was produced and he has stated on oath in his statement that deal for vast land at Village Jaganpur Duaba was being made where share of Shri Pritam Singh, my father was as owner of around 14-15 bigha. deal of land of Shri Pritam Singh (assessee s father) was settled for Rs. 25,00,000/- out of which he has given Rs. 13,25,000/- as advance to assessee against purchase of said land. He has further stated that when it comes to his notice/knowledge that said land is on " Patta" and "Patta" was expected to be cancelled any time, so he has taken his money back. I further note that during course of first appellate proceedings, remand report regarding worthiness of Sh. Ravinder Bhati was called for by Ld. CIT (A) from concerned A.O. (I.T.O. ward-4, Noida) who, vide his letter dated 29-03-2010, has stated in his conclusion that "the capacity of Sh. Ravindra Bhati to advance for purchase of agricultural land may be considered" Keeping in view of facts and circumstances of case, addition of Rs. 12,98,800/- made by AO is not sustainable in eyes of law and has been wrongly added without corroborating any evidence including evidences produced by assessee which is also contrary to law and facts of case. Therefore, addition in dispute is not sustainable and is hereby deleted. 4 8. In result, appeal filed by assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in Open Court on 04/10/2016. Sd/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER Date: 04/10/2016 SRBhatnagar Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4.CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order, Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Benches 5 Usha Nagar v. ITO, Ward-4, Noida