P R K Eeswara Varma , Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(4), Hyderabad

ITA 1116/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5404 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-05-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Next Hearing Date: 28-04-2021
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDEEP MEHTA
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

ITA NO 1116 OF 2019 PRK EESWARA VARMA HYDERABAD PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD SMC BENCH, HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1116/HYD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SRI P.R.K.EESWARA VARMA HYDERABAD PAN:APDPP7918N VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 15(4) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SRI SAMUEL NAGADESI REVENUE BY : SRI SANDEEP MEHTA, DR DATE OF HEARING: 28/04/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05/05/2021 ORDER THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE A.Y 2010-11 AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-7, HYDERABAD, DATED 4.6.20 19. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL, RUNNING A FIRM INCORPORATED DURING THE YEAR 2010-11 ALONGWITH HIS WIFE SMT. P. TARAKESWARI. IT CAME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10, THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CASH DEPOSITS OF MORE THAN RS .10.00 LAKHS INTO HIS BANK A/CS. ON VERIFICATION OF RECORD, IT R EVEALED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y 2010-11. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REOPENED THE ASSES SMENT U/S 147 BY ISSUANCE OF A NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT DATED 10 .04.2016. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE SOURCES FOR THE CASH DEPOSIT S AND THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE OUT OF PAST SAVINGS AND GIFTS RECEIVE D FROM HIS MOTHER AND HIS MOTHER-IN-LAW AND ALSO SALE OF AGRIC ULTURAL LAND BY HIS WIFE. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED COPIES OF CONFI RMATION LETTERS ITA NO 1116 OF 2019 PRK EESWARA VARMA HYDERABAD PAGE 2 OF 3 FROM HIS MOTHER AND MOTHER-IN-LAW WHEREIN THEY CONF IRMED THAT OUT OF THEIR AGRICULTURAL INCOME, THEY HAVE GIFTED THE AMOUNT OF RS.1,50,000/-EACH TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS FURTHER E XPLAINED THAT THE LAND SOLD BY HIS WIFE WAS FOR A CONSIDERATION O F RS.1,23,500/- VIDE DOCUMENT NO.595/2009 AND THAT THE CASH BALANCE BROUGHT FORWARD FROM FINANCIAL YEAR WAS RS.11,78,500/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HOWEVER, ACCEPTED THE SOURCES TO THE EXTENT OF 50% ONLY AND THE BALANCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO TAX. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A), BUT THE CIT (A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND TH E ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY RAISING THE FO LLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND FACT S OF THE CASE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OUGHT NOT TO HAVE CONFI RMED THE ASSESSMENT OF ADDITION UNDER DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS AS SUCH NO LOSS IS THERE TO BE DISALLOWED. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE ASKED FOR A RE MAND OF RE- COMPUTATION AFTER ALLOWING DEDUCTIONS UNDER CHAPTER VIA. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED TH E DIFFERENCE IN ASSESSMENT AS FIRM OR INDIVIDUAL. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVE LEAVE TO ADD TO, ALTER, MOD IFY, DELETE, AMEND, SUBSTITUTE ALL OR ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI SAMUEL NAGADESI, REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE TH E AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PRODUCE THE RELEVANT DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING O FFICER AND THE CIT (A) AND PLEADED FOR ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER SO THAT THE ASSESSEE CAN EXPLAIN THE SOURCE S FOR THE CASH DEPOSITS. ITA NO 1116 OF 2019 PRK EESWARA VARMA HYDERABAD PAGE 3 OF 3 4. THE LEARNED DR WAS ALSO HEARD. 5. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I DEEM IT FI T AND PROPER TO REMAND THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER FOR DENOVO CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO M ENTION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE GIVEN A FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF H EARING. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH MAY, 2021. SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 5 TH MAY, 2021. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: S.NO ADDRESSES 1 SRI PRK EESWARA VARMA, FLAT NO.102, GOLD GREEN APAR TMENTS, I RRAM MANZIL COLONY, PUNJAGUTTA, HYDERABAD 2 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 15(4) 5 TH FLOOR, IT TOWERS, D BLOCK AC GAURDS, MASAB TANK, HYDERABAD 500028 3 CIT (A) - 7, HYDERABAD 4 PR. CIT - 7, HYDERABAD 5 DR, ITAT HYDERABAD BENCHES 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER