Neera Rajya Laxmi Rana, New Delhi V. ITO, Ward-3(1), New Delhi

ITA 1097/DEL/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5474 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 09-09-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHREENATH A KHEMKA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

I.T.A.No.1097/Del/2021 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.स ं /.I.T.A No.1097/Del/2021 /Assessment Year: 2011-12 Neera Rajya Laxmi Rana E-5, Defence Colony, New Delhi. ब म Vs. ITO Ward 3(1) New Delhi. PAN No. AIVPR8733J अ Appellant /Respondent िनधा रतीक ओरसे /Assessee by Sh. Shreenath A Khemka राज वक ओरसे /Revenue by Shri Farhat Khan, Sr. DR स ु नवाईक तारीख/ Date of hearing: 09.02.2022 उ ोषणाक तारीख/Pronouncement on 31.03.2022 आदेश /O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Gurgaon dated 18.11.2019 for the AY 2011-12. Assessee raised the following effective grounds: - 1. “That the CIT(Appeals) has charged the deposit transaction of INR 11,50,000/- dated 20.04.2011 (UTR No. IL 367001004201192) in the Appellant’s Standard Chartered Savings A/c (No. 52110093441) to Income Tax as undisclosed income u/s 147 r/w 148. 2. That the aforesaid deposit transaction took place on 20.04.2011, and was outside the scope of the AY 2011-12 (i.e. FY 2010-11) qua which the present proceedings have been initiated. Therefore, the said amount could not be charged to income tax for the AY 2011-12 as the same was beyond the 31 st of March, 2011. 3. That the aforesaid amount was deposited from the Appellant’s SBI Savings A/c (No. 11428276439) to her Standard Chartered Saving A/c (No. 52110093441), vide Cheque No. 433805. In fact, the impugned order at para 5 specifically recorded the sender of the said amount to be “NEERA RAJYA LAXMI RANA” i.e. the Appellant herself. Notwithstanding, the CIT(Appeals) charged the said transaction to income tax, which was arbitrary and unlawful. Because, the said I.T.A.No.1097/Del/2021 2 deposit was an inter-bank transfer within the Appellant’s own bank A/cs, hence the same was never income so as to be chargeable to income tax.” 2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment made addition of Rs.18,50,000/-as unexplained deposits which consist of cash deposits of Rs.7,00,000/- and other than cash deposits of Rs.11,50,000/-. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) it was explained that the assessee withdrew cash and deposited in her bank account and, therefore, the cash deposits made in the bank account are explained. The Ld. Counsel submits that the Ld.CIT(Appeals) deleted the addition in so far as addition of Rs.7,00,000/- is concerned. However, he sustained the bank entry in respect of Rs.11,50,000/. Inviting my attention to para 5 of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) order Ld. Counsel submits that it is the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that on perusal of bank statement there was bank transfer from Neera Rajya Laxmi Rana. The Ld. Counsel submits that assessee – Neera Rajya Laxmi Rana had transferred this deposit of Rs.11,50,000/- from her bank account in State Bank of India to her bank account in Standard Chartered Bank and this is nothing but inter-bank transfer by assessee from one account to another account of the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel submits that since this bank transfer is one account to another account of the assessee the entry is explained and the said transfer cannot be treated as unexplained deposit. On a query as to whether the assessee has produced her bank statement in SBI before the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the bank statement of the assessee in State Bank of India was not produced before the Ld. CIT(Appeals). The Ld. Counsel submits that if an opportunity is given to the assessee she can produce the bank account statement and can explain the entry to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel submits that since it is only a bank I.T.A.No.1097/Del/2021 3 transfer from assessee’s account there cannot be any addition on account of unexplained deposits. 3. The Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 4. Heard rival submissions and perused the orders of the authorities below. 5. I find from the assessment order that the Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain the entries in Standard Chartered bank account with documentary evidences, nature of transaction and the source of these deposits. It is the finding of the Assessing Officer that the assessee failed to file any explanation on cash deposits and also the non cash deposits. Therefore, he proceeded to add these deposits of Rs.18,50,000/- as unexplained deposits. Before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) it was explained that Rs.7,00,000/- was withdrew by the assessee from her account on various dates and the same were deposited into her bank account. This explanation of the assessee was accepted by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and accordingly he deleted the addition in so far as the cash deposit of Rs.7,00,000/- is concerned. 6. Coming to non-cash deposit of Rs.11,50,000/- is concerned the Ld. CIT(Appeals) on perusal of the bank statement, observed as under: “Perusal of bank statement shows entry “IL 367001004201192 SBINH10110310712 NEERA RAJYA LAXMI RANA SENDER IFSCSBIN0002997 IL 36701004201192RVSD.” Since the appellant failed to provide any explanation about this credit entry, the addition made by the Assessing Officer is sustained.” 7. From the above, it could be seen that bank statement of the assessee in Standard Chartered Bank was furnished before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and there is entry in the statement that there is transfer from State Bank of India and Neera Rajya Laxmi Rana is the sender. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel that the bank statement of the I.T.A.No.1097/Del/2021 4 assessee in State Bank of India from where the transfer was made was not available with the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and, therefore, the addition was sustained observing that assessee failed to provide any explanation. The Ld. Counsel submits that given an opportunity the assessee is ready to explain the entry. 8. The Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 9. On hearing the rival contentions and perusing the order of the authorities below I am of the view that this issue has to go back to the Assessing Officer for examining the bank statements of the assessee to ascertain whether the contention of the assessee that it is only a bank transfer from one account to another account made by the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, this appeal is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining afresh in the light of the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. Thus, the Assessing Officer shall decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard. Needless to say the assessee may file the bank statements to prove her contention that these transaction is only a bank to bank transaction from assessee bank accounts. Ground no. 3 is allowed for statistical purpose. 10. The contention raised by the assessee in ground no. 2 is left open and no opinion/decision is expressed on this ground. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 31/03/2022 Sd/- (C.N. PRASAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 31.03.2022 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. I.T.A.No.1097/Del/2021 5 Copy of order sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard file of ITAT. By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT: Delhi Benches-Delhi