Smt. Piya Gulati, Chandigarh V. ACIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

ITA 1071/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6521 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 30-07-2019
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 14-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR G S PHANI KISHORE CIT DR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Search and seizure; Additional evidence; Set aside
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BEN CH B, CHANDIGARH .., ! '# #$ %, & '( BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP & SHRI , SANJAY GARG, JM ITA NO. 1071/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SMT. PIYA GULATI H.NO. 1272, SECTOR-18C CHANDIGARH ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-II CHANDIGARH PAN NO: ABHPG6568K APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SINGH, ADVOCATE #!' REVENUE BY : DR. G.S. PHANI KISHORE, CIT DR $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 30/07/2019 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01/08/2019 ')/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 30/06/2018 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-3, GURGAON. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL READ AS UN DER: 1) THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE A ND HAS THEREBY ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS 2,45,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDIT ENTRY IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS UNJUSTIFIED AS THE CREDIT ENTRY REPRES ENTED SALE PROCEEDS OF CAR FOR WHICH CONFIRMATION WAS FILED. THE ADDITION BEING AR BITRARY DESERVES TO BE DELETED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE IT IS PRAYED THAT ADDITION SUS TAINED MAY KINDLY BE DELETED OR SUCH OTHER RELIEF BE GRANTED AS IS DEEMED FIT. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION UNDER SECTION 132(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINA FTER REFERRED TO AS ACT), WAS CONDUCTED ON 30/06/2010 IN GULATI GROUP OF CASES AN D CERTAIN DOCUMENTS BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE WERE SEIZED, PHOTOCOPIES OF WHICH WERE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 1 53A(1) OF THE ACT DT. 28/04/2011, THE ASSESSEE FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME ON 23/05/2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,24,210/-. THE A.O. DURING THE COURS E OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A CREDIT ENTRY OF RS. 2,45,0 00/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE CHEQUE NO. 213308 DT. 01/07/2005 FOR WHICH NO EXPLANATION WAS 2 FURNISHED REGARDING THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF RECEIP T. HE, THEREFORE MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,45,000/-. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ADDITION BY MAKING THE FOLLOWING OBSE RVATIONS: (I) ON PERUSAL OF BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT ALO NG WITH THE BANK NARRATION FILED IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT W AS OBSERVED BY THE AO THAT NO EXPLANATION REGARDING THE CREDIT ENTRY OF RS. 2,45, 000/- BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT WITH PNB ON 01.07.2005 WAS FILED. (II) DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS SUBM ITTED BY THE APPELLANT THAT AMOUNT OF RS. 2,45,000/- WAS RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE N O. 213308 DATED 01.07.2005, BUT THE APPELLANT DID NOT FILE ANY EXPLANATION REGA RDING THE NATURE OF RECEIPT AND SOURCE OF RECEIPT. (III) IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT NO SATISFACTORY EXPL ANATION WAS FILED BY THE APPELLANT, THE AO ADDED RS. 2,45,000/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT. (IV) DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLAN T HAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE ENTRY RELATED TO 7-8 YEARS BACK, THE RELEVANT P ROOF COULD NOT BE SUBMITTED AND NOW SHE HAS BEEN ABLE TO GET THE EVIDENCE IN TH E SHAPE OF PHOTOCOPY OF THE CHEQUE ALONGWITH EVIDENCE OF SALE OF HONDA CITY CAR. THEREFORE, A REQUEST TO ADMIT THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. (V) THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE SUBM ITTED AS THE APPELLANT HAS NOT FILED ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING THE OWNERSHIP OF THE CAR, WHICH IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN SOLD. IN ABSENCE OF THE SAME, THE EVIDENC E OF SALE OF THE CAR DOES NOT HAVE ANY EVIDENTIARY VALUE AND HENCE NOT ACCEPT ED AS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO EXPLAIN THE CREDIT ENTRY OF RS. 2,45,00 0/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS CONFIRMED. 5. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 6. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE O F HEARING FURNISHED THE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DT. 05/01/2013 ISSUED BY MR. VI PAN KHOSLA STATING THEREIN THAT HE PURCHASED HONDA CITY CAR ON 29/06/2005 FROM THE ASSESSEE FOR A SUM OF RS. 2,45,000/- THROUGH PAY ORDER NO. 213308 DT. 29/06/2 005. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID DOCUMENT WAS BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW BUT THEY HAVE NOT APPRECIATED IT IN RIGHT PERSPECTIVE. 7. IN HER RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. CIT DR SUPPORTE D THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CA SE IT IS NOTICED THAT THE CERTIFICATE FROM MR. VIPAN KHOSLA IS DT. 05/01/2013 WHILE THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY THE A.O. ON 30/11/2012 THEREFORE THE SAID CERTIFICATE WAS NOT 3 AVAILABLE TO THE A.O. FOR HIS CONSIDERATION. WE THE REFORE CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LA W AFTER CONSIDERING THE AFORESAID REFERRED TO CERTIFICATE, CLAIMED TO BE FU RNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01/08/2019 ) SD/- SD/- #$ % .., (SANJAY GARG ) ( N.K. SAI NI) & '(/ JUDICIAL MEMBER ! / VICE PRESIDENT AG DATE: 01/08/2019 (+! ,-.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE (+ $ BY ORDER, ; # ASSISTANT REGISTRAR