DCIT, New Delhi V. Mr. Rajneesh Chopra, New Delhi

ITA 1000/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1686 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 28-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR KETIA
• Keywords: Gift; Income from undisclosed sources; Loose papers; Revised return
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, J M ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 DCIT, CIRCLE 37(1), NEW DELHI. VS. MR. RAJNEESH CHOPRA, 101, NILGIRI APARTMENTS, 9, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI 110 001. PAN: AAPPC2128J ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 MR. RAJNEESH CHOPRA, 101, NILGIRI APARTMENTS, 9, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI 110 001. PAN: AAPPC2128J VS. DCIT, CIRCLE 37(1), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SALIL AGGARWAL, ADVOCATE & SHRI SHAILESH GUPTA, CA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJESH KUMAR KETIA, SR. DR ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 2 DATE OF HEARING : 01.10.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.10.2015 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, AM: THESE TWO CROSS APPEALS ONE BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE OTHER BY THE REVENUE ARISE OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT( A) ON 26.12.2012 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. THIS IS A RECALLED MATTER. 2. FIRST TWO GROUNDS OF THE REVENUES APPEAL ARE AG AINST REDUCING THE `INCOME FROM PROFESSION FROM RS.54,00,899/- AS DE TERMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) TO RS.40,17,517/-. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS AN ADVOCATE BY PROFESSION, WHO FILED HIS ORIGINAL RETU RN DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3,43,550/-. SUCH RETURN WAS PROCESSED ON 6.12.2010. A SURVEY OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED ON 1.12.2010 U/S 133 A OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER ALSO CALLED THE ACT) A T THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE AT 101, NILGIRI APARTMENTS, BARAKHA MBA ROAD, NEW DELHI. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY OPERATIONS, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 3 ASSESSEE RECEIVED PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS THROUGH CHE QUES AS WELL AS IN CASH, BUT, HAD DECLARED IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME ONL Y THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED BY CHEQUES. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY O PERATIONS, CERTAIN DIARIES, REGISTERS, LOOSE PAPERS, DATA FROM COMPUTE R COPIED IN HARD DISK ETC. WERE IMPOUNDED. THESE DOCUMENTS WERE MARKED A S ANNEXURE A-1 TO A-27. ENTRIES IN THESE REGISTERS WERE CONFRONTE D TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF RECORDING OF HIS STATEMENT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY ON 1.2.2010. VIDE QUESTION NO. 10, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-0 6 TO 2009-10, IN RESPONSE TO WHICH IT WAS STATED THAT THE SAME WILL BE PRODUCED, BUT WERE NEVER PRODUCED. THE ASSESSEE WAS CONFRONTED WITH TH E REGISTERS INCORPORATING THE ENTRIES OF RECEIPTS OF FEE. ON BE ING CALLED UPON TO IDENTIFY WHETHER SUCH ENTRIES IN THE REGISTERS PERT AINED TO HIM, THE ASSESSEE REPLIED THAT THE SAME PERTAINED TO M/S C&C ASSOCIATES, BEING THE PROFESSIONAL FIRM, IN WHICH HE WAS A PARTNER FO R SOME PERIOD OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. HE, HOWEVER, SUBMITTED NO EXPLANATION AS TO HOW THESE CASH ENTRIES WERE MADE IN THIS REGISTER. THE ASSESSEES OFFICE ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 4 PREPARED DETAILS OF CASH RECEIPTS FROM THESE REGIST ERS WHICH WERE NOT DECLARED IN THE INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 200 5-06 TO 2010-11. ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED THAT THESE ENTRIES W ERE REFLECTED IN THE REGISTER, BUT, SHOWED IGNORANCE ABOUT THEIR NON-REF LECTION IN THE RETURNS OF INCOME. ON A FURTHER QUERY AS TO WHETHER THESE ENTRIES REPRESENTED ANY OTHER RECEIPTS SUCH AS LOAN, GIFT, ETC., THE AS SESSEE REPLIED IN NEGATIVE. AFTER EXAMINING THE ENTIRE IMPOUNDED MAT ERIAL, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE AO THAT PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS WERE NOT PROPERLY REFLECTED IN THE RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE YEARS IN CLUDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUE D. IN RESPONSE TO SUCH NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE FILED A RETURN ON 29.9.20 10 DECLARING INCOME OF RS.22,58,500/-. THE ASSESSEE RAISED OBJECTIONS AGAI NST THE NOTICE U/S 148, WHICH HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED ON PAGES 4 AND 5 OF TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE AO DISMISSED SUCH OBJECTIONS VIDE HIS SEPARATE ORDER DATED 15.10.2010, WHICH HAS BEEN INCORPORATED ON PAGES 5 AND 6 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ON APPRECIATION OF THE ENTIRE MAT ERIAL BEFORE HIM, THE AO NOTICED THAT ONLY CHEQUE RECEIPTS WERE OFFERED F OR TAXATION BY THE ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 5 ASSESSEE AND THE FEE COLLECTED IN CASH WAS NOT SHOW N AS INCOME. THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, BILLS AND VOUCHERS FOR THE EXPENSES DURING THE COUR SE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. NO SUCH DETAILS WERE FURNISHED. THE A O NOTICED THAT THE IMPOUNDED REGISTER TRANSPIRED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT ONLY RECORDED ALL RECEIPTS IN IT BUT ALSO THE EXPENSES INCURRED. HE, THEREFORE, OBSERVED THAT A ROUGH ESTIMATION OF INCOME TO THE TUNE OF 50% OF RECEIPTS RECORDED IN THE REGISTER MADE WHILE RECORDING REASONS FOR RE-OP ENING, WAS NOT APPROPRIATE. IT WAS FURTHER NOTICED FROM THE REGI STER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CALCULATED NET PROFIT AT THE END OF EACH MONTH IN THIS REGISTER ITSELF, AFTER DEDUCTING ALL THE EXPENSES INCURRED IN CASH O R THROUGH CHEQUES FROM THE TOTAL RECEIPTS RECEIVED DURING THE MONTH I N CASH OR THROUGH CHEQUES. MONTH-WISE WORKING OF PROFIT FROM 1.4.20 04 TO 31.3.2005 AS RECORDED IN THE REGISTER A-7 HAS BEEN TABULATED BY THE AO ON PAGE 9 OF ASSESSMENT ORDER AS UNDER:- ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 6 S. NO. MONTH NAME OF ANNEXURE OF IMPOUND ED MATERIAL RECEIPTS RECORDED FROM PAGES (IN RS.) TOTAL AMOUNT OF RECEIPTS DURING THE MONTH (IN RS.) EXPENSES OF CHEQUE EXPENSES OF CASH (BY OTHER NAME) NET PROFIT FOR THE MONTH PAGE NO. 1 APRIL, 2004 A-7 77-74 4,94,580 50,583 76,711 3,67 ,286 74 2 MAY,, 2004 -DO- 73-70 5,27,390 47913 81288 3,98,1 89/- 70 3 JUNE, 2004 -DO- 69-65 4,16,680/- 99,308 79,755/- 2,37,617/- 65 4 JULY, 2004 -DO- 64-61 6,05,259/- 96,382 96,708/- 4,12,169/- 61 5 AUG, 2004 -DO- 60-53 16,99,797/- 1,22,529/- 3,41, 329/- 12,35,939 53 6 SEPT., 2004 -DO- 52-48 8,61,399/- 1,04,008/- 1,24 ,470/- 6,32,921 48 7 OCT, 2004 -DO- 47-43 4,91,775/- 86,302/- 60,250/- 3,45,223 43 8 NOV, 2004 -DO- 42-36 5,93,113/- 73,987/- 54,195/- 4,64,931 36 9 DEC, 2004 -DO- 35-30 7,14,291/- 1,02,836/- 75,649 /- 5,35,806 30 10 JAN, 2005 -DO- 29-23 7,87,609/- 2,03,546/- 1,13, 949/- 4,70,114 23 11 FEB., 2005 -DO- 22-17 6,16,706/- 1,56,924/- 88,7 00/- 3,71,082 17 12 MARCH, 2005 -DO- 16-10 10,05,307/- 1,89,077/- 1, 21,143/- 6,95,087 10 TOTAL 88,13,906/- 13,33,395/ 13,14,147/- 61,66,3 64 4. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ABOVE CALCULATION OF NET PROFIT FROM THE REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PERIOD RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION DIVULGED INCOME OF RS.61,66,364/-, WHICH WAS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE NET PROFIT DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS ORIGINAL RETURN FILED ON 31.10.2005 AT RS.3,40, 057/- AND IN THE REVISED RETURN FILED ON 29.9.2010 AT RS.22,58,500/- IN RESP ONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148. ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 7 ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE BASIS OF SHOWING UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN THE REVISED RETURN. T HE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN ERRORS IN THE CAL CULATION MADE BY THE AO. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED A LETTER DATED 6.12.2 010 CONTENDING THAT THE REGISTERS IMPOUNDED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY WER E NOT PROPERLY MAINTAINED. THE ASSESSEE FILED A CHART TO REFLECT THE EFFECT OF DISCREPANCIES IN THE REGISTER AS UNDER:- MONTH AS PER AO BROUGHT FORWARD DIFFERENCE CASH DIFFERENCE OTHER DIFFERENCES BALANCE AMOUNT JUNE, 2004 416680 9425 55800 351455 JULY, 2004 605259 3045 114546 487668 AUG, 2004 1699797 341329 1358468 SEPT., 2004 861399 158687 702712 OCT, 2004 491775 7000 169515 315260 NOV, 2004 593113 176860 416253 DEC, 2004 714291 50000 88649 575642 JAN, 2005 787609 12556 134366 640687 FEB., 2005 616706 65959 376196 174551 MARCH, 2005 1005307 12997 131830 860480 TOTAL 7791936 160982 1747778 5883176 ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 8 5. THE AO CONSIDERED THE SO-CALLED DISCREPANCIES PO INTED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE MONTH-WISE RECEIPTS DUE TO CARRY FO RWARD OF LAST MONTHS CASH AND THE BROUGHT FORWARD DIFFERENCE AND HELD TH AT THE INCOME WAS NOT AFFECTED BY THESE ADJUSTMENTS. HE, HOWEVER, CO NCURRED WITH THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION ABOUT THE EXCLUSION OF INCOME OFFERED FOR TWO MONTHS, NAMELY, APRIL AND MAY, 2004 BECAUSE THIS WA S EARNED BY THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS A PARTNE R AT THE MATERIAL TIME. AFTER DEDUCTING NET PROFIT OF APRIL AND MAY, 2004 A MOUNTING TO RS.3,67,286/- AND RS.3,98,189/- RESPECTIVELY, FROM THE TOTAL NET PROFIT AS PER REGISTER A-7 AMOUNTING TO RS.61.66 LAC AS REPRO DUCED ABOVE, THE AO DETERMINED THE AMOUNT OF PROFESSIONAL INCOME AT RS.54,00,889/-. SINCE THIS WAS THE AMOUNT OF MONTH-WISE NET PROFIT AS PER THE ASSESSEES OWN REGISTER FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, AFT ER EXCLUSION OF EXPENSES, THE AO HELD THAT NO SEPARATE 50% DEDUCTIO N OF GROSS RECEIPTS ON THE BASIS OF ROUGH ESTIMATION WAS WARRANTED SIN CE THE AMOUNT OF ACTUAL EXPENSES WAS DEDUCTED. HE, THEREFORE, TREATE D THE NET PROFIT FROM PROFESSION AT RS.54,00,889/- AS PER THE IMPOUNDED R EGISTERS AS OPPOSED ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 9 TO A SUM OF RS.22,58,500/- WHICH WAS DECLARED BY TH E ASSESSEE IN THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME. DURING THE COURSE OF THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE FILED, INTER ALIA , A SUMMARY OF RECORDINGS IN THE IMPOUNDED REGISTER CONTAINING INFIRMITIES IN TH E CALCULATION OF INCOME AS MADE BY THE AO. THE SAME WAS SENT BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE AO FOR COMMENTS. THE AO VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 15.1 0.2012 CONCURRED WITH THE VIEW OF HIS PREDECESSOR AND DID NOT MENTIO N ANYTHING FURTHER REFUTING THE CLAIMS/OBJECTIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE . THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO FILE HIS COMMENTS AGAI NST THE AOS REMAND REPORT, WHICH WERE SUBMITTED AND HAVE BEEN RECORDED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTICED THAT THE OBJECTIONS R AISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RELATION TO THE WRONG CALCULATION OF INCOME FROM THE IMPOUNDED REGISTERS WERE NOT DISPROVED BY THE AO. THE LD. CI T(A), ON THE BASIS OF SUMMARY OF RECORDINGS IN THE IMPOUNDED REGISTERS SH OWING MONTH-WISE INCOME AND EXPENSES, COMPUTED TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.40,17,517/- AS AGAINST RS.54,00,889/- WORKED OUT BY THE AO. THIS RESULTED INTO A RELIEF TO THE EXTENT OF RS.13,83,37 2/-. THE REVENUE IS ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 10 CONTESTING SUCH RELIEF ALLOWED BY THE LD. FIRST APP ELLATE AUTHORITY AND THE ASSESSEE IS ASSAILING THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION MADE IN THE FIRST APPEAL. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED POSITION THAT CERTAIN REGISTERS INCORPORATING MONTH-WISE PROFESSIONAL REC EIPTS AND EXPENSES IN CASH AND CHEQUES ALONG WITH MONTH-WISE PROFIT WERE IMPOUNDED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. SUCH REGISTERS PERTAINED TO VARIOUS YEARS. IN SO FAR AS THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS CONCE RNED, TOTAL INCOME WAS COMPUTED BY THE AO FROM SUCH REGISTERS TO THE T UNE OF RS.54.00 LAC. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY WORTHWHILE OBJECTION FROM THE AO DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE ASS ESSEES WORKING OF MONTH-WISE PROFIT FROM SUCH REGISTER AT RS.40.17 LA C FOR THE YEAR IN QUESTION. THE LD. DR COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY DISCRE PANCY IN SUCH WORKING OF NET PROFIT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WIT H ANY COGENT MATERIAL. WHEN THE POSITION IS SUCH, WE FAIL TO AP PRECIATE AS TO HOW A DIFFERENT VIEW CAN BE TAKEN FROM THE ONE CANVASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). IT ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 11 IS PALPABLE THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT MIST AKES TO THE AO IN HIS CALCULATION OF PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS AND EXPENSES F OR THE YEAR IN QUESTION BUT THE AO CHOSE NOT TO ADVERSELY COMMENT THE SAME, THE NATURAL PRESUMPTION IS THAT THE ASSESSEES CALCULATION WAS CORRECT. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THA T THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION AT RS.40,17,51 7/-. WE ARE UNABLE TO COMPREHEND THE RATIONALE BEHIND THE ASSESSEES ASSA ILING THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT SUSTAINED IN THE FIRST APPEAL, BECAUSE THE SAME IS BASED ONLY ON THE WORKING OF NET PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS SUBMITT ED BY THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THESE TWO GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE AND THE CHALLENGE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE SUSTE NANCE OF THIS ADDITION IN HIS GROUND OF APPEAL. 7. GROUND NO. 3 IS AGAINST RESTRICTING THE ADDITION OF INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES FROM RS.4,99,266/- TO RS.2,82,8 38/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CHALLENGED THE SUSTENANCE OF ADDITION. 8. SUCCINCTLY, THE FACTS OF THIS GROUND ARE THAT TH E ASSESSEE ALSO MAINTAINED A SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT NO.702611 WITH AB N AMRO BANK ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 12 (NOW RBS) DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, WHIC H WAS NOT DISCLOSED FOR INCOME-TAX PURPOSE. THE AO EXTRACTED DEPOSITS IN THE SAID SAVINGS ACCOUNT FROM 1.4.2004 TO 31.3.2005 TOTALING TO RS.5,35,560.52. ON BEING CALLED UPON TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THE A BOVE DEPOSIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE NAR RATION AND ALSO ACCEPTED A SUM OF RS.2,82,838/- AS UNDISCLOSED INCO ME EMANATING FROM THIS SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT. ENTRY-WISE NARRATION GI VEN BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK HAS BEEN REPRODUCE D ON PAGES 15-16 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE AO GOT CONVINCED WITH TH E ASSESSEES CONTENTION TO THE EXTENT OF FOUR ENTRIES REPRESENT ING DEPOSITS IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT TO THE TUNE OF RS.36,295/-. HE FURTHER OBS ERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS A PARTNER IN COSTA & CHOPRA, ADVOCATES IN APRIL , 2004 AND DREW A SALARY OF RS.7,500/- FOR EACH MONTH, WHICH WAS NOT SEPARATELY SHOWN AS TAXABLE. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUBMITTING ANY PROOF ABO UT THE CLAIM OF TRANSFER ENTRIES FROM ANOTHER BANK ACCOUNT TO THIS BANK ACCOUNT, THE AO HELD THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS.4,99,266/- (RS.5, 35,560 RS.36,295/-) WAS UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR THE YEAR. THIS ADDITION WAS MADE AS AGAINST ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 13 THE ASSESSEES LETTER DATED 15.12.2010 OFFERING ADD ITIONAL INCOME ON THIS SCORE AMOUNTING TO RS.2,82,838/-. THAT IS HOW, A SU M OF RS.4.99 LAC WAS ADDED TO THE ASSESSEES TOTAL INCOME. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT ONLY A SUM OF RS.2,82,838/- WAS INC OME FROM THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE ABOVE BANK ACCOUNT. AS REGARDS THE REMAINING AMOUNTS, IT WAS STATED THAT THE SAME WERE WITHDRAWA LS AND RE-DEPOSITS FROM ONE ACCOUNT TO ANOTHER. THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND CORRECT THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION ABOUT THE TRANSFER OF MONEY F ROM CURRENT ACCOUNT TO SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT. THE REVENUE IS NOT HAPPY W ITH THE DELETION OF ADDITION TO THIS EXTENT AND THE ASSESSEE IS OPPOSIN G THE SUSTENANCE OF PRO TANTO ADDITION. 9. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THE POINT AND PER USED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSE E CATEGORICALLY STATED BEFORE THE AO THAT CERTAIN DEPOSITS IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO. 702611 MAINTAINED WITH ABN AMRO BANK, WERE TRANSFER ENTRIE S FROM ONE ACCOUNT TO ANOTHER. EVEN ENTRY-WISE DETAILS WERE A LSO FURNISHED WHICH THE AO REFUSED TO ACCEPT FOR WANT OF ANY FURTHER CO RROBORATION. WHEN ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 14 THE CURRENT ACCOUNT AND SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WERE A VAILABLE WITH HIM, THE AO WAS OBLIGED TO CROSS CHECK THE ENTRIES. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS EXAMINED THIS ASPECT AND FOUND THE ASSESSEES CONTE NTION CORRECT. THE LD. DR FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE POSITION ASCERTAINE D BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. WE, THEREFORE, HOLD THAT THE LD. CIT( A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN REDUCING THE ADDITION TO RS.2,82,838/-, BEING THE S AME AMOUNT AS WAS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF. AGAIN, WE DO NOT FIND ANY LOGIC BEHIND THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION FOR ALLOWING FURTHER RELI EF BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF ADMITTED UNDISCLOSED INCOME FROM THIS BANK ACCOUNT AMOUNTING TO RS.2,82,838/-. WE, THEREFORE, COUNTENANCE THE VI EW TAKEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS SCORE. 10. LAST EFFECTIVE GROUND OF THE REVENUES APPEAL I S AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.15,490/-. THE AO INCLUDE D BANK INTEREST OF RS.15,490/- IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. T HE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THIS ADDITION BY OBSERVING THAT THE BANK INTEREST R EPRESENTING INTEREST INCOME OF RS.15,490/- ALREADY STOOD ADDED BY THE A O IN THE ASSESSEES ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 15 TOTAL INCOME AS A PART OF TOTAL CREDITS APPEARING I N THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT. 11. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT BANK INTERES T OF RS.15,490/- EMANATING FROM THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WHICH WAS N OT DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE AND OTHER CREDIT ENTRIES IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT, EXCEPT THE TRANSFER ENTRIES, HAVE BEEN SEPARATELY ADDED, FOR WHICH WE HAVE SUSTAINED AN ADDITION OF RS.2,82,838/-. SINCE THE BANK INTEREST OF RS.15,490/- IS PART OF SUCH ADDITION SUSTAINED IN T HE FIRST APPEAL, ANY FURTHER ADDITION FOR THE BANK INTEREST WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE TAXATION OF SAME INCOME. WE, THEREFORE, APPROVE THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THIS ADDITION. THIS GROUND FAILS. 12. THE ONLY OTHER ISSUE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN H IS APPEAL IS AGAINST RE-OPENING OF ASSESSMENT. THE LD. AR WAS FAIR ENOU GH AND, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION RIGHTLY SO, NOT TO PRESS THIS GR OUND OF APPEAL. THE SAME IS, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. ITA NO.1000/DEL/2013 ITA NO.1232/DEL/2013 16 13. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06.10.201 5. SD/- SD/- [SUCHITRA KAMBLE] [R.S. SYAL] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED, 06 TH OCTOBER, 2015. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.