Mayank J Thakkar, Banaskantha V. The ITO, Ward-2, Palanpur

ITA 1091/AHD/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7486 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद ᭠यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘’ SMC’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT AT AHMEDABAD) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1091/AHD/2019 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Mayank J. Thakkar, Sunrise Park Part-2, Opp. Patel Society, Deesa, Banaskantha-385535. PAN: AKOPT9626R Vs. I.T.O., Ward-2, Palanpur. (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr.D.R सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 11/11/2021 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 29/11/2021 आदेश/O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Ahmedabad, dated 13/05/2019 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2011-12. ITA no.1091/AHD/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 2 2. When the matter was called for hearing there was nobody appeared from the side of the assessee despite the fact that the notice intimating the date of hearing was duly served upon the assessee. This fact can be verified from the acknowledgement issued by the post office which is available on record. In the absence of any communication from the side of the assessee, we deem it fit to proceed to adjudicate the dispute involved in the appeal ex parte to the assessee and after hearing the learned DR of the Revenue. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition made by the AO for ₹90,000/- on account of low drawings/household expenses. 4. The assessee in the present case is an individual and engaged in the activity of share/commodity trading. The assessee in response to notice under section 148 of the Act has filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 9,42,751/- only. However the AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee has shown gross drawings towards household expenses for ₹ 10,000/- only which in his opinion was very low. Accordingly, he has estimated the household expenses of ₹1 lakh and therefore made an addition of ₹ 90,000/- only to the total income of the assessee. 4.1 On appeal, the learned CIT (A) also confirmed the same. 5. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. The learned DR before us vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. ITA no.1091/AHD/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 3 7. We have heard the learned DR and perused the materials available on record. The 1 st question that arises before us for our adjudication whether the low drawings towards the household expenses represents the income of the assessee. The answers stands negative. In fact, the AO in the present case is drawing inference that the assessee has withdrawn a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards household expenses which is a negligible amount and therefore the assessee must be having undisclosed income which has been utilized for the household expenses. The inference of the AO, how strong it is, but is of no consequence until and unless it is based on some concrete materials. These materials can be in the form of various expenses such as mobile expenses, car running expenses, electricity bills of the house, travelling expenses and education expenses. But the authorities below has not brought anything on record about such expenses. 7.1 Likewise, the contention of the assessee that he is unmarried, staying with his parents who are earning members and therefore he is not liable to incur any expense towards the household affairs, has not been doubted by the authorities below. Thus, we are of the view that the addition made by the authorities below is based on the surmise and conjecture which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly we set aside the finding of the learned CIT (A) and direct the AO to delete the addition made by him. 8. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 29/11/2021 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (WASEEM AHMED) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 29/11/2021 Manish