ANAND KUMAR JHA,HOWRAH V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

ITA 12/GTY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Anand Kumar Jha against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Central NER, Guwahati, which confirmed the addition of \\u20b970,28,363 as unexplained credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer following a search operation under section 132(1) of the Act on the Prasad Group, which included the assessee. The Tribunal examined the details provided by the assessee, including a breakdown of various credit items in his bank account, and found that these were properly recorded and explained. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the deletion of the addition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25658 (ITAT-GUWAHATI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAUSIK RAY
• Assessee Lawyers: S S.S. GUPTA; SANJEEV CHOUDHURY; ARS
• Keywords: Set aside; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 142(1); 143(2)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “GUWAHATI” BENCH, GUWAHATI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JM ITA No.12/GTY/2024 (Assessment Year:2021-22) Anand Kumar Jha 99 Sailendhar Road, Howrah-711204 West Bengal Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1 GS Road, Guwahati-781005 Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AJFPJ0101K Assessee by : S/Shri S.S. Gupta & Sanjeev Choudhury, Ars Revenue by : Shri Kausik Ray, DR Date of hearing: 30.01.2025 Date of pronouncement : 11.02.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Central NER, Guwahati (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 08.12.2023 for the AY 2021-22. 02. The only issue raised by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the addition of ₹7,28,363/- as made by the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act. 03. The facts in brief are that a search action was taken u/s 132(1) of the Act on Prasad Group including the assessee. The case of the assessee was selected for a complete scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued. Accordingly, the assessee filed the return of income on Page | 2 ITA No.12/GTY/2024 Anand Kumar Jha; A.Y. 2021-22 30.12.2021, declaring total income of ₹4,78,740/-. Thereafter, the ld. AO issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire which was replied by the assessee from time to time. The ld. AO noted that the assessee has three bank accounts; one with ICICI bank and second with Bank of India and the aggregate credits appearing in the three bank accounts were ₹30,92,249/-, whereas the assessee has only reported the total income at ₹6,21,397/- and accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee as to why the difference of ₹24,70,852/- should not be treated as unexplained credit. The assessee replied to the said show cause notice. The assessee furnished the reconciliation statement of the credit receipts. According to the ld. AO, the assessee did not provide any explanation as regards credits of ₹7,28,363/- appearing in the bank account number ‘400110110002709’ with Bank of India and finally, the ld. AO treated the same as unexplained credit and added the same to the income of the assessee. 04. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) also dismissed the appeal of the assessee, after taking into consideration the reply filed by the assessee, wherein the assessee submitted the amounts of credits pertained to the re-imbursement of expenses in the various group of companies in which the assessee is an employee, some revenues receipts and journal entries. However, according to the ld. CIT (A), the assessee has not produced any evidences corroborating the same and accordingly, the appeal was dismissed. 05. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the credits appearing in the bank account number ‘400110110002709’ with Bank of India, was on account of other incomes received by the assessee as accounting income or interest income, journal entries or on account of Page | 3 ITA No.12/GTY/2024 Anand Kumar Jha; A.Y. 2021-22 reimbursement. We have examined the details furnished by the assessee at annexure 1, wherein the breakup of various items of credits which were given by the assessee. For the sake of ready reference, the same is extracted below:- Anand Kumar Jha (Annexure ‘A) Year ended 31.03.2021 Headwise details of deposits in Bank of India A/c No.2709 Particulars Credits by Bank Accounting Income 75278 Bank Interest 8869 Received from Client 248,716 Salary 212000 Nity Jha 100000 Amoutn Deposited (cash) 49,000 Transfer from BOI A/c No. 15394 14500 Dipika Sau 20000 Total 728363 06. We observe from the above details and the books of accounts that same were incorporated by the assessee in his books of accounts and accordingly items of incomes were duly shown in the profit and loss account, whereas the other items such as re-imbursement of expenses and transfers to other bank accounts etc. were also duly shown. Therefore, we do not agree with the conclusion drawn by the ld. CIT (A) on this issue. Consequently, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT (A) and direct the ld. AO to delete the addition. 07. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 11.02.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANOMOHAN DAS) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 11.02.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Page | 4 ITA No.12/GTY/2024 Anand Kumar Jha; A.Y. 2021-22 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati "