Tarlochan Singh, Mandi Gobindgarh V. ITO, Mandi Gobindgarh

ITA 1057/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8301 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Peak credit; Source of fund

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT & MS. RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1057/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SH. TARLOCHAN SINGH VS. THE ITO, WARD-1, MANDI GOBINDGARH MANDI GOBINDGARH PAN NO. AEWPS7427P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. TEJ MOHAN SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.K.MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 28.03.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.03.2016 ORDER PER H.L.KARWA, VP THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), PATIALA DATED 26.9.2014 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2009-10. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APP EAL READS AS UNDER:- THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1899581/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCO UNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN THE BANK IN SPITE OF EVIDE NCE LED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING ASSESSMENT & APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ASSESSEE T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. HE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 20 TH OCTOBER 2009 DECLARING TOTAL 2 INCOME AT RS. 2,14,920/-. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') ON 18.2.2011 AT THE RETURNED INCOME. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UN DER CASS SCHEME. STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT AS PER INFORMATION ON RECORD THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS. 18,99,581/- IN CASH ON DIFFERENT DATES IN HIS SAVING ACCOUNT NO. 0 450015000080 WITH ICICI BANK, POST OFFICE ROAD, MANDI GOBINADGARH DURING TH E PERIOD FROM 1.4.2008 TO 31.3.2009. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE ASSESSE E TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT OF RS. 18,99,581/- CREDITED IN HIS BANK ACC OUNT WITH ICICI BANK AT MANDI GOBINDGARH. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS LETTER DAT ED 14.12.2011 STATING THAT MAIN SOURCE OF DEPOSIT WAS RS. 10 LACS BEING LOAN AGAINST PROPERTY AVAILED FROM STATE BANK OF PATIALA DURING THE YEAR UNDER CO NSIDERATION. IN SUPPORT OF THE ABOVE CONTENTION, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED BANK STATE MENTS FROM BOTH THE BANKS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO GAVE FURTHER OPPORTUNITI ES TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT OF RS. 18,99,581/-. THE ASSES SING OFFICER WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND, THE REFORE, HE HELD THAT THE WITHDRAWALS MADE FROM THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA B Y MR. PARDEEP SINGH AND MS. MEENAKSHI DID NOT PROVE THAT THE SAME MONEY WAS DEPOSITED WITH THE ICICI BANK. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OPINED THAT ASSESSEE H AD SOME OTHER SOURCES OF INCOME FOR WHICH HE MAINTAINED A SEPARATE SAVING B ANK ACCOUNT WITH ICICI BANK, MANDI GOBINDGARH. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTH ER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE RC TRANSFERRED IN THE NAME OF SHR I GAGANDEEP SINGH. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSE E FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE AMOUNT OF RS. 2,50,000/ - RECEIVED AS ADVANCE MONEY ON ACCOUNT OF AGREEMENT OF PROPERTY TO SELL. CONSE QUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED A SUM OF RS. 18,99,581/- U/S 68 OF T HE ACT. 3 3. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER STATING THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDEN CE TO SHOW THAT THE MONEY RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF CHEQUE ISSUED TO MR PARDEEP SINGH AND MS. MEENAKSHI WAS ACTUALLY USED TO DEPOSIT THE SAME IN THE BANK A CCOUNT. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE TRANSFER OF CAR WAS IN EARLIER YEAR AND D ID NOT PERTAIN TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ACCORDING TO CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE AL SO FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE REGARDING AGREEMENT TO SELL OF THE PROPERTY. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. CIT(A) REJECTED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE ALS O PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE COPY OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION S DATED 3.9.2014 AND ALSO TO THE COPY OF THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD 1.4.2008 TO 31.3.2009 FILED BEFORE CIT(A) (PAGES 11 TO 15 OF THE PAPER BOOK), A ND SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ALTERNATIVE CONTENTIO N OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH READS AS UNDER:- THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NO WHERE HELD THAT T HE MONEY WITHDRAWN FROM THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA WAS NOT AV AILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE BUT HAS DOUBTED THE EVIDENCE FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE ON CONJECTURES AND SURMISES ONLY. WE ARE E NCLOSING HEREWITH CHART SHOWING THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE CASH A VAILABLE AGAINST CAR SALE AND ADVANCE AGAINST PROPERTY. THE ASSESSEE RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THAT EVEN IF AVAILABILITY OF TH IS CASH IS NOT CONSIDERED THE PEAK SHORT CASH WITH THE ASSESSEE CO MES AT RS. 247331/- ONLY. SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN IGNORING THE ABOVE ALT ERNATIVE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, SHRI TEJ MOHAN SI NGH LD. COUNSEL FOR THE 4 ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ABOVE ALTERNATIVE CONT ENTION OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE CONSIDERED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. HOWEVER, SHR I TEJ MOHAN SINGH, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY ABOVE ALTERNATIVE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE CONSIDERED. AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE ALTERNATIVE CONTENTION OF SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND PERUSING THE CASH FLOW CHART SUBMITTED BEFORE T HE CIT(A), WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND REMAND THE LIMITED ISSUE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO COMPUTE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UN EXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT ON THE BASIS OF PEAK CREDIT IN THE AFORESAID BANK ACCOUNT. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO TH E ASSESSEE. FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED PARTLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.3.2016 SD/- SD/- (RANO JAIN) (H.L.KARWA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED : 31 ST MARCH, 2016 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR