Dr.S.B.Kumari, CHENNAI V. DCIT Central Circle 1(1), CHENNAI

ITA 1000/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2464 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HOMI RAJVANSH
• Assessee Lawyers: P RANGA RAMANUJAM

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , !' .$%$&, ( ') BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.999 & 1000/CHNY/2018 & +& / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 & 2009-10 DR. S.B. KUMARI, NO.6B, C BLOCK, ANUGRAHA APARTMENT, NO.19, NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD, CHENNAI - 600 034. PAN : AJMPK 6466 F V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. (-./ APPELLANT) (/0-./ RESPONDENT) -. 1 2 / APPELLANT BY : SH. P. RANGA RAMANUJAM, CA /0-. 1 2 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HOMI RAJVANSH, CIT 3 1 4( / DATE OF HEARING : 12.02.2019 56+ 1 4( / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.03.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGA INST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 18, CHENNAI, DATED 17.01.2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EARS 2008-09 AND 2009-10. SINCE COMMON ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDE RATION IN BOTH 2 I.T.A. NOS.999 & 1000/CHNY/18 THE APPEALS, WE HEARD THESE APPEALS TOGETHER AND DI SPOSING THE SAME BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. LETS FIRST TAKE I.T.A. NO.999/CHNY/2018 FOR ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 3. SH. P. RANGA RAMANUJAM, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE F OR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE OPENING CAPITAL ACCOUN T OF THE ASSESSEE AS ON 01.04.2007 WAS 1,39,48,566/-. HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE CLOSING BALANCES IN UCO BANK AND INDIAN BANK WERE NOT DISCL OSED TO THE DEPARTMENT. REFERRING TO THE COPY OF RETURN OF INC OME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE RE IS NO COLUMN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME TO DISCLOSE THE BANK ACCOUN T. AT THE BEST, THE ASSESSEE CAN DISCLOSE THE INTEREST ACCRUED / CR EDITED TO THE ACCOUNT TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR TAXATION. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE ENTIRE FUNDS WERE FROM THE KNOW N SOURCE OF INCOME. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CLAUSE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME REGARDING BANK ACCOUNT, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRES ENTATIVE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE ACCOUNTS IN UCO BANK, SAIDAPET BRANCH AND INDIAN BANK, ALWARPET BRANCH. 3 I.T.A. NOS.999 & 1000/CHNY/18 MOREOVER, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THER E WAS NO DEPOSIT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THESE ARE ALL CLOSING BALANCES AS ON 31.03.2007. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED FOR ADDITION DURING THE YEAR U NDER CONSIDERATION. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI HOME RAJVANSH, THE LD. DEP ARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ACCOUNTS MAINTAI NED WITH UCO BANK, SAIDAPET BRANCH AND INDIAN BANK, ALWARPET BRA NCH WERE NOT DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT AT ALL. ACCORDING TO T HE LD. D.R., THE CLOSING BALANCE AS ON 31.03.2007 AT UCO BANK, SAIDA PET BRANCH WAS 45,16,188/-. THE CLOSING BALANCE AS ON 31.03.2007 AT INDIAN BANK, ALWARPET BRANCH WAS 10,48,344/-. SINCE THE BANK ACCOUNTS WERE NOT DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE CREDIT AVAILABLE IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS IS CONSIDERED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY, A SUM OF 1,39,48,566/- WAS FOUND TO BE CLOSING BALANCE. THE OPENING BALANCE AS ON 01.04.2007 WAS 83,84,034/-. THE CLOSING BALANCE AT UCO BANK WAS 45,16,188/-. THE CLOSING BALANCE AT 4 I.T.A. NOS.999 & 1000/CHNY/18 INDIAN BANK WAS 10,48,344/-. ADMITTEDLY, ALL THESE AMOUNTS WERE CLOSING BALANCES AS ON 31.03.2007. IT IS NOT A FRE SH DEPOSIT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN THE DEPOSITS WERE MADE IN THE BAN K ACCOUNT, IT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE YEAR IN WHICH THE DEPO SITS WERE MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. ADMITTEDLY, NO DEPOSIT WAS MA DE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. MOREOVER, AS RIGHTLY SUB MITTED BY THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, THERE WAS NO COLUM N IN THE RETURN OF INCOME TO DISCLOSE THE BANK ACCOUNTS. AT THE BE ST, THE ACCRUED / CREDITED INTEREST ON THE ACCOUNT AS ON 31.03.2007 M IGHT HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE DEPARTMENT. ADMITTEDLY, NO ADDITI ON WAS MADE TOWARDS INTEREST. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS TRI BUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE CANNOT BE ANY ADDITIO N WITH REGARD TO CLOSING BALANCE FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS AS ON 31 .03.2007. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS UNABLE TO UPHOLD THE OR DERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ADDITION OF 1,39,48,566/- IS DELETED. 6. NOW COMING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 IN I.T.A. NO.1000/CHNY/2018, SH. P. RANGA RAMANUJAM, THE LD. 5 I.T.A. NOS.999 & 1000/CHNY/18 REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THERE WAS A DEPOSIT OF 94,33,290/- IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AT INDIAN B ANK, ALWARPET BRANCH. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE A SSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT. THE SUM OF 94,33,290/- IS NOTHING BUT A CHEQUE DEPOSITED IN THE INDIAN BANK. REFERRI NG TO COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BANKER, THE LD. REPRESENT ATIVE SUBMITTED THAT ON THE BASIS OF THE CHEQUE ISSUED BY M/S GLOBA L EXPORTS, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, A DEMAND DRAFT WAS ISSUED IN FAVO UR OF THE ASSESSEE FOR 94,33,290/-. REFERRING TO BANK ACCOUNTS, COPY OF WHICH ARE AVAILABLE AT PAGES 11 TO 13, THE LD. REPR ESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT M/S GLOBAL EXPORTS, A PARTNERSHIP FI RM ISSUED CHEQUE FOR 94,41,144/- FOR ISSUE OF BANKERS CHEQUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE BANK AFTER DEDUCTING ITS COMMISSION, ISSUED CHEQUE / DD FOR 94,33,290/-. INSPITE OF THESE FACTS, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). 7. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI HOMI RAJVANSH, THE LD. DEP ARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO CO-RELA TION BETWEEN THE AMOUNTS MENTIONED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S GL OBAL EXPORTS 6 I.T.A. NOS.999 & 1000/CHNY/18 AND THAT OF THE ASSESSEE. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENC H, THE LD. D.R. CLARIFIED THAT WHAT WAS DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE F OR 94,33,290/- IS A CHEQUE AND NOT CASH DEPOSIT. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED A CHEQUE IN INDIAN BANK FOR 94,33,290/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WRONGLY MENTIONED IT AS A CAS H DEPOSIT. THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD CLEARLY SHOWS THAT M/S GLOBAL EXPORTS, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ISSUED A CHEQUE TO INDIAN BANK F OR ISSUING DEMAND DRAFT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE EXTEN T OF 94,41,144/-. THE BANK AFTER ACCEPTING THE CHEQUE, ISSUED A DEMAND DRAFT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE FOR 94,33,290/-. THE DIFFERENCE IS THE COMMISSION TAKEN BY THE INDIAN BA NK. THIS WAS ALSO CLARIFIED BY THE BANK BY A CERTIFICATE, A COPY OF WHICH IS AVAILABLE AT PAGE 5 OF THE PAPER-BOOK. THE ASSESSE E HAS ALSO FILED A COPY OF DEMAND DRAFT ISSUED BY INDIAN BANK IN HER FAVOUR. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE SITUATION / CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE CHEQUE WAS ISSUED. I N THOSE FACTUAL SITUATION, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINI ON THAT THE DEPOSIT OF 94,33,290/- WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFO RE, WE ARE 7 I.T.A. NOS.999 & 1000/CHNY/18 UNABLE TO UPHOLD THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELO W. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE T HE AND THE ADDITION OF 94,33,290/- IS DELETED. 9. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 7 TH MARCH, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( !'.$%$& ) ( . . . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ( / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 8 /DATED, THE 7 TH MARCH, 2019. KRI. 1 /49: ;:+4 /COPY TO: 1. -. /APPELLANT 2. /0-. /RESPONDENT 3. 3 <4 () /CIT(A)-18, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, CENTRAL-1, CHENNAI 5. := /4 /DR 6. >& ? /GF.