Kavita B. Patil, Pune V. Income-tax Officer,

ITA 1104/PUN/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1035 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 01-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR CHAWARE
• Keywords: Salary income
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

- IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC , PUNE , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM . / ITA NO. 1104 /PN/201 6 / ASSESSM ENT YEAR : 20 0 7 - 0 8 KAVITA B. PATIL, SARITA CO - OP HOUSING SOCIETY, 134/1, F.NO.2, MAYUR COLONY, KOTHRUD, PUNE 411029 . / APPELLANT PAN: A HGPP0229F VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 7 (2), PUNE . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI HARI KRISHNA / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANIL KUMAR CHAWARE / DATE OF HEARING : 01 . 0 9 .201 6 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09 . 0 9 .201 6 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J M : TH IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) - 3 , PUNE , DATED 12 . 0 4 .20 1 6 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 0 7 - 0 8 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 1 4 3(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . 2 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLL OWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - ITA NO. 1104 /PN/20 1 6 KAVITA B. PATIL 2 1 . IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,00,900/ - MADE BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK A CCOUNT WITH HDFC BANK. THE AFORESAID ADDITION BEING ARBITRARY, PERVERSE, BASED ON SURMISES AND CONJECTURE THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED SAID ADDITION. THE IMPUGNED ADDITION MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. 2. THE APPELLANT DENIES HIS LIABILITY TO PAY A NY INTEREST U/S 234B AND 234C OF THE IT ACT, 1961 AND HENCE THE SAME MAY PLEASE BE DELETED. 3. THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS.2,00,900/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RAISED THE ISSUE AGAINST INTEREST CHARGED UNDER SECTION 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 4. BRIEFLY, IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,07,064/ - . IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED FOR SCRUTINY, THE ASSESSEE HERSELF ATTENDED AND EXPLAINED THE RE TURN AND PRODUCED THE DOCUMENTS / INFORMATION AS CALLED FOR. THE ASSESSEE WAS EMPLOYED WITH HDFC BANK LTD. AND DERIVES INCOME FROM SALARY, HOUSE EMPLOYED WITH HDFC BANK LTD. AND DERIVES INCOME FROM SALARY, HOUSE PROPERTY, CAPITAL GAINS AND OTHER SOURCES. ON VERIFICATION OF THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS NOTED BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CASH DEPOSITS INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT ON DIFFERENT DATES AS TABULATED UNDER PARA 6 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, TOTALING RS.2,00,900/ - . THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF ABOVE SAID CASH DEPOSITS. HOWEVE R, TILL FINALIZING OF ASSESSMENT, NO EXPLANATION WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAID DEPOSITS TOTALING RS.2,00,900/ - WERE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME UNDER SECTION 69A OF THE ACT. 5. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT SHE WAS WORKING WITH HDFC BANK AND THIS WAS HER ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME. THE HUSBAND OF ASSESSEE WAS EMPLOYED WITH CITI BANK GROUP, PUNE AND IT WAS FURTHER CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT HER HUSBANDS INCOME WAS ABOUT RS.8 LAKHS AND HE HAD DRAWN ITA NO. 1104 /PN/20 1 6 KAVITA B. PATIL 3 CERTAIN AMOUNTS FROM CITI BANK AC COUNT, WHICH WERE DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HER BANK ACCOUNT TOTALING RS.2,00,900/ - . BEFORE THE CIT(A), THERE WAS NON - COMPLIANCE AND REFERRING TO THE STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE, THE RE IS NO MERIT IN THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AND THE SAME WAS REJECTED. 6. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 7. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO THE BANK SUMMARY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSE SSEE, WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGE 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND POINTED OUT THAT THERE WERE SOME CASH WITHDRAWALS, WHICH IN TURN, HAD BEEN UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. ANOTHER PLEA RAISED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FO R THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE HUSBAND OF ASSESSEE TOTALING RS. 6,43,200/ - AND IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT PART OF THE SAID AMOUNT WAS UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR DEPOSITS INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO REFERRED TO THE BANK STATEMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 8. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE ON THE OTHER HAND, PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 9. ON PERUSAL OF RECORD AND AFTER HEARING BOTH THE L EARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES, THE LIMITED ISSUE ARISING IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH ITA NO. 1104 /PN/20 1 6 KAVITA B. PATIL 4 HDFC BANK TOTALING RS.2,00,900/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED THE SAID AMOUNT T OTALING RS.2,00,900/ - ON DIFFERENT DATES AS UNDER: - DATE AMOUNT 21/6/06 69300/ - 02/8/06 25000/ - 01/2/07 12000/ - 05/2/07 14600/ - 26/3/07 50000/ - 29/3/07 30000/ - TOTAL 2,00,900/ - 10. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT THE SOURCE O F SAID CASH DEPOSITS WERE OUT OF WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND HER HUSBAND FROM DAY - TO - DAY FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE BANK ACCOUNTS. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT SHE WAS SALARIED EMPLOYEE WITH HDFC BANK AND HER HUSBAND WAS EMPLOYEE OF CITI BANK GROUP AND BESIDE THE SALARY INCOME, WHICH WAS THEIR MAJOR SOURCE OF INCOME, THERE WAS NEGLIGIBLE INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. UNDOUBTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HAD MADE SEVERAL CASH WITHDRAWALS. HOWEVER, THE PERUSAL OF BANK ACC OUNT, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT WITHDRAWALS. HOWEVER, THE PERUSAL OF BANK ACC OUNT, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGES 3 TO 10 OF THE PAPER BOOK REFLECTS THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE MADE SMALL CASH WITHDRAWALS ON EACH DAY RANGING FROM RS.700/ - TO ABOUT RS.1,000/ - AND SOMETIMES HIGHER AMOUNTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN RS.15,000/ - ON 05.06. 2006 AND THEN RS.16,000/ - ON 09.06.2006 OUT OF ATM WITHDRAWALS, AS AGAINST WHICH, SUM OF RS.69,300/ - WAS DEPOSITED ON 21.06.2006. THE ASSESSEE AT BEST HAS EXPLAINED THE AVAILABILITY OF RS.3 1 ,000/ - AS CASH IN HAND BECAUSE THE EARLIER WITHDRAWALS MADE BY TH E ASSESSEE WERE TOO PETTY. ON A PARTICULAR DATE, THE ASSESSEE WAS SOMETIMES MAKING WITHDRAWALS OF TWO DIFFERENT AMOUNTS I.E. ON 26.04.2006, THERE WAS ATM WITHDRAWAL OF RS.1500/ - AND ANOTHER ATM WITHDRAWAL OF RS.400/ - . SIMILAR ENTRIES ARE FOUND ON VARIOUS DATES I.E. ON 01.07.2006, THERE IS ATM WITHDRAWAL OF RS.1000/ - AND ANOTHER WITHDRAWAL OF RS.1000/ - ON THE SAID DATE ITSELF. FURTHER, ON 05.07.2006, THE ITA NO. 1104 /PN/20 1 6 KAVITA B. PATIL 5 ASSESSEE HAD WITHDRAWN SUM OF RS.1000/ - . THE WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE THUS, DO NOT INSPIRE CON FIDENCE THAT THE SOME CONSTITUTE BALANCE CASH IN HAND AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. IN CASE CASH WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE OUT OF WITHDRAWALS MADE FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT, WHERE WAS THE NECESSITY TO DRAW RS. 1000/ - TO RS.2000/ - FROM DAY - TO - DAY AND EVEN ON ONE PARTICULAR DAY, THE WITHDRAWAL OF MONEY BY TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT TRANSACTIONS THROUGH ATM. THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED SUM OF RS.50,000/ - ON 26.03.2007 AND FURTHER SUM OF RS.30,000/ - ON 30.03.2007 , BEFORE DEPOSITING SUM OF RS.14,600/ - ON 05.02.2007 , AGAINST WHICH THERE WERE NO CASH WITHDRAWALS IN INTERVENING DATES. THE AVAILABILITY OF CASH IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS THUS, DOUBTED EXCEPT AS REFERRED IN THE PARAS ABOVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CASH WITHDRAWALS OF RS.15,000/ - ON 05.06.2006 AND RS.16,000/ - ON 09.06.2006 , WHICH CAN BE SAID TO BE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. 11. NOW, COMING TO THE SECOND STAND OF ASSESSEE THAT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IS OUT OF WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE HUSBAND OF ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ON RECORD THE BANK STATEMENT OF HER HUSBAND. UNDOUBTEDLY, THERE ARE CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT BUT THE WITHDRAWALS ARE SIMILARLY MADE BY HER HUSBAND IN THE RANGE OF RS.2000/ - TO RS.5000/ - AND ON SOME OCCASIONS HIGHE R WITHDRAWALS OF RS.10,000/ - TO RS.15,000/ - HAS BEEN MADE. HOWEVER, THE EXPLANATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE ACCEPTED IN THE ENTIRETY AS THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES ARE ALSO TO BE MET OUT OF WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND HER HUSBAND. ACCORDINGLY , THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTED TO THE EXTENT OF AVAILABILITY OF CASH OF RS. 1 LAKH FROM HER HUSBAND. FURTHER, SUM OF RS.31,000/ - OUT OF WITHDRAWALS FROM THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTED AND ADDITION TO THAT ITA NO. 1104 /PN/20 1 6 KAVITA B. PATIL 6 EXTENT IS DELETED. HOWEVER, THE ADDIT ION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 69 ,900/ - IS CONFIRMED. THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THUS, PARTLY ALLOWED. 12. THE LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT IS CONSEQUENT IAL AND HENCE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED. THE GROUND OF A PPEAL NO.2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THUS, DISMISSED. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS, PARTLY ALLOWED. 1 3 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 9 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 201 6 . SD/ - (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; DATED : 9 TH SEPTEMBER , 201 6 . GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RE SPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 3 , PUNE ; 4. / THE PR. CIT - 4 , PUNE ; 5. 6. , , , - / DR SMC , ITAT, PUNE; / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE C OPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE