Abdul Fayyum, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-1, Vikarabad

ITA 1057/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 105722514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 08-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D SUDHAKAR RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: TEJ PRAKASH TOSHNIWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P. M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.1057/HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-2006 ABDUL FAYYUM MAMBAPUR (V), PEDDIMUL(M), R.R. DIST. PAN AKTPA1130G VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.1, VIKARABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : MR. TEJ PRAKASH TOSHNIWAL FOR REVENUE : MR. D. SUDHAKAR RAO DATE OF HEARING : 27.05.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.06.2015 ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, A.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-III, HYDERABAD DATE D 24.04.2013 WHEREBY HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS. 14,37,320 MADE BY THE A.O. TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSE E ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS FOUND TO BE MADE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INDIVIDU AL WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CLOTH AND KIRANA MERCHANT. AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE A.O., TH E ASSESSEE HAD MADE DEPOSITS OF RS.14,37,322 IN HIS SAVINGS BA NK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH GOLKONDA GRAMEENA BANK, TAN DOOR BRANCH. SINCE THESE TRANSACTIONS WERE NOT REFLECTED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER 2 ITA.NO.1057/HYD/2013 ABDUL FAYYUM, R.R. DISTRICT. CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY THE A .O. BY ISSUING A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 ON 18.02.2009. I N REPLY, A LETTER DATED 27.02.2009 WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE R EQUESTING THAT THE RETURN FILED BY HIM ORIGINALLY ON 19.12.20 07 MAY BE TREATED AS THE RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTI CE UNDER SECTION 148. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED UPON BY THE A.O. TO EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS FOUND TO BE MADE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. IN REPLY, IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DEPOSITS FOUND T O BE MADE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT REPRESENTED CHIT FUND AMOUNT RE CEIVED FROM M/S. MAHALAXMI CHIT FUND, BUSINESS LOAN OBTAIN ED FROM DECCAN BANK AS WELL AS THE SALE PROCEEDS OF HIS BUS INESS. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, THE SAID E XPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE HOWEVER WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE A.O . AND HE ADDED THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS OF RS.14,37,320 TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE TREATING THE SAME AS U NEXPLAINED IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) VI DE ORDER DATED 28.11.2009. 3. AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O. UNDER SECT ION 143(3), AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE BEF ORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE THE A.O. WAS REITERATED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) IN ORDER TO E XPLAIN THE CASH DEPOSITS FOUND TO BE MADE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. SINCE THERE WAS NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE TO SUPPORT AND SUBSTANTIATE THE SAID EXPLANATION EVEN DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HIM, THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT ACCEPT THE SAME AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSITS FOUND TO BE MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE TREATING THE SAME AS UNEXPL AINED. 3 ITA.NO.1057/HYD/2013 ABDUL FAYYUM, R.R. DISTRICT. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSES SEE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED BEFORE US THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFOR E THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WHILE EXPLAINING THE DEPOSITS FOU ND TO BE MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS AL SO FILED THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AS ADDITIONAL EV IDENCE IN SUPPORT WITH AN APPLICATION SEEKING ADMISSION THERE OF. (1) COPY OF RELEVANT BANK STATEMENT SHOWING THAT T HE TOTAL DEPOSITS MADE THEREIN DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE ONLY RS.9,86,420. (2) LETTER FROM DECCAN BANK FOR THE LOAN AVAILED. (3) ACCOUNT COPY OF CHIT FUND FROM MAHALAXMI CHIT FUNDS. (4) COPIES OF LICENCE ISSUED BY THE GRAM PANCHAYAT, VILLAGE MAMBAPUR. (5) PROOF OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. 5. AS THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AR E VERY MUCH RELEVANT TO DECIDE THE ISSUE RELATING TO THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS FOUND TO BE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BA NK ACCOUNT AND LEARNED D.R. HAS ALSO NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION FOR THE ADMISSION THEREOF, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ADMITTED BY US. HAVING ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL E VIDENCE, WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVE OF BOTH THE SIDES THAT THE MATTER MA Y BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH, AFTER VERIFYING THE SAID ADDITIONAL EVIDENC E. ACCORDINGLY, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE A ND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF A.O. WITH A DIREC TION TO DECIDE 4 ITA.NO.1057/HYD/2013 ABDUL FAYYUM, R.R. DISTRICT. THE SAME AFRESH AFTER VERIFYING THE ADDITIONAL EVID ENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PRO PER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATE D AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.06.2 015. SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 05TH JUNE, 2015. VBP/- COPY TO 1. ABDUL FAYYUM, MAMBAPUR (V), PEDDIMUL (M), R.R. D IST C/O. MR. TEJPRAKASH TOSHNIWAL, ADVOCATE, 4-1-6/B/4, RAMKOTE, HYDERABAD 500 095. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.1, VIKARABAD. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III, HYDERA BAD. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. I.T.A.T. A BENCH, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE