Sri Sanjiv Kumar Singh, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward 36(3), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1040/KOL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4653 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Peak credit
• Section: 201; 144

Judgement Text

, C , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1 040 - 1 042 /KOL/ 201 7 & ITA NO.1104/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2009-10 TO 2012-13 SHRI SANJIV KUMAR SINGH C/O S.C. BAID & ORS. 4, RAJA WOODMUNT STREET, 2 ND FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 001 [ PAN NO. AWHPS 3849 J ] / V/S . INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-36(3), AAYKAR BHAWAN POORVA 110, SHANTIPALLY KOLKATA-700 074 /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY ASSESSEE SHRI SUBASH AGARWAL, ADVOCATE ! /BY REVENUE SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT, SR-DR /DATE OF HEARING 15-10-2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18-10-2019 /O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THESE FOUR ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR( S) 2009-10 TO 2012-13 ARISE AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-10 , KOLKATAS SEPARATE ORDERS; ALL DATED 17.01.2017 PASSED IN CASE NOS.272-274 & 146/C IT(A)-10/W-36(3)/2015- 16/KOL. INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 144/147 IN FORME R THREE AND SEC. 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT IN LAST ASSESSMEN T YEAR; RESPECTIVELY. 2. IT EMERGES AT THE OUTSET THAT THE ASSESSEES LAS T APPEAL ITA NO.1104/KOL/2017 SUFFERS FROM 32 DAYS DELAY IN FILING STATED TO BE ATTRIBUTABLE CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND HIS ITA NO.1040-1042/KOL/2017 & 1104/KOL/2017 A.YS 09-10 TO 12-13 SH. SANJIV KR. SINGH VS ITO WD-36(3), KOL. PAGE 2 CONTROL. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE IS VER Y FAIR IN NOT DISPUTING CORRECTNESS THEREOF. WE THUS CONDONE THE IMPUGNED DELAY OF THIR TY TWO DAYS IN FILING OF INSTANT APPEAL ITA NO.1104/KOL/2017. THE SAME IS NOW TAKEN UP FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 3. A COMBINED PERUSAL OF ALL THESE CASE FILE(S) SUG GESTS THAT ASSESSEES SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE IDENTICALLY PLEADED IN THESE FOUR CASES SEEKS TO REVERSE BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IDENTICAL ACTION TREATING HIS BA NK DEPOSITS OF 5,46,22,860/-, 17,07,40,951/-, 6,38,98,700/- & 1,99,61,610/-; ASSESSMENT YEAR-WISE RESPECTIVELY AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS IN THE COURSE OF ASSESS MENT AS AFFIRMED IN THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 4. THERE IS NO DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES ABOUT TH E ASSESSEE TO HAVE MADE THE IMPUGNED BANK DEPOSITS IN THE NAME OF HIS PROPRIETA RY CONCERNS M/S HILAND SECURITIES, M/S KANAK VYAPAAR AND M/S SANJIV ENTERP RISES IN THEIR RESPECTIVE BANK ACCOUNTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT( A) HOLD THE SAME TO BE UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS FOR MAKING THE IMPUGNED AD DITION IN ASSESSEES HANDS. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY CONT ENDS DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT PUT IN APPEARANCE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXPLAIN SOURCE OF ALL THESE CASH CREDITS. THE VERY FACTUAL POSITION IS STATED TO HAVE BEEN CONTINUED BEFORE THE CIT(A) AS WELL. THE ASSESSEES ARGUMENTS ON THE OTHER HAND ARE THAT HE COULD NOT BE PROPERLY SERVED DURING THE CUR SE OF SCRUTINY SINCE THE RELEVANT HEARING NOTICE(S) HAD BEEN RECEIVED BY HIS FAMILY M EMBERS. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT EVEN ON MERITS, NEITHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOR T HE CIT(A) HAVE CONSIDERED THE CLINCHING FACT OF THE CORRESPONDING PEAK CREDIT STA TEMENT AS WELL AS TELESCOPING BENEFIT TO BE GRANTED IN SUCH A CASE INVOLVING MULTIPLE CRE DIT AND DEBIT TRANSACTIONS IN BANK ACCOUNTS. MR. AGARWAL HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ASSESSEES DETAILED PAPER BOOK RUNNING INTO 57 PAGES FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO SI MULTANEOUSLY CONSIDER PEAK OF THE AMOUNTS DEPOSITED TO BE FOLLOWED BY TELESCOPING BEN EFIT IN THESE FOUR ASSESSMENT YEARS. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEES INSTANT PLEADING S PRIMA FACIE CORRECT PER SE . THE FACT ALSO REMAINS THAT THIS ASSESSEE; WHO IS STATED TO H AVE SET UP HIS BUSINESS IN THE NAME OF VARIOUS PROPRIETARY CONCERNS TO CARRY OUT ENTRY OPE RATIONS BUSINESS HAD NOT APPEARED ITA NO.1040-1042/KOL/2017 & 1104/KOL/2017 A.YS 09-10 TO 12-13 SH. SANJIV KR. SINGH VS ITO WD-36(3), KOL. PAGE 3 BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE THEREFORE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE INSTANT SOLE IDENTICAL SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE OF THE CORRECTNESS OF THE IMPUGNED CASH DEPOSITS INVOLVING VARYING SUMS OF MONEY ASSESSMENT YEAR-WIS E (SUPRA) BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR AFRESH ADJUDICATION AS PER LAW WITHIN T HREE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITIES OF HEARING. NECESSARY PEAK CREDIT AS WELL AS TELESCOPI NG BENEFIT SHALL ALSO BE CONSIDERED AS PER LAW IN CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS. NO OTHER ARGUMENT HAS BEEN RAISED BEFORE US. 5. THESE ASSESSEES FOUR APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR ST ATISTICAL PURPOSES IN ABOVE TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 18/10/2019 SD/- SD/- ( !) () !) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) (S.S.GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *DKP-SR.PS * - 18/10/2019 / KOLKATA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /ASSESSEE-SRI SANJIV KUMAR SINGH C/O S. C.BAID & OR S 4, RAJA WOODMUNT STREET, 2 ND FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 001 2. ! /REVENUE-ITO WD-36(3), AAYKAR BHAWAN, PORVA, 110, SHANTIPALLY KOLKATA-074 3. - . / CONCERNED CIT 4. . - / CIT (A) 5. / ))- , - /DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 3 / GUARD FILE. BY ORD ER/ , /TRUE COPY/ -,