SHRI UMESH KUMAR PUJARI, LAXMANGARH, SIKAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-1, JAIPUR

ITA 1127/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9834 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-07-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 17-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K C GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: K L MOOLCHANDAN I
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENC HES A JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRA M SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 1127/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010-11 SH. UMESH KUMAR PUJARI S/O SH. BALMUKAND PUJARI PUJARI KI GALI WARD NO. 8, LAXMANGARH, SIKAR-321607 CUKE VS. THE ITO, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AQRPP3754B VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SH. K. L. MOOLCHANDANI (AR) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SH. K. C. GUPTA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 01/07/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02/07/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)- 2, JAIPUR DATED 23.07.2019 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN A SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY ERRED IN DISMISSING THE A PPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,96,6 50/- MADE BY THE LD. AO ON ACCOUNT OF THE ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED BANK D EPOSITS, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN RIGHT PERSPEC TIVE. THUS THE ADDITION SO MADE AND CONFIRMED BY THE AUTHORITIES B ELOW DESERVES TO BE DELETED. ITA NO. 1127/JP/2019 SH. UMESH KUMAR PUJARI, SIKAR VS. THE ITO, WARD 4( 1), JAIPUR 2 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR SUBMITT ED THAT THE APPELLANT IS A 'PUJARI', PERFORMING RELIGIOUS RITUALS AND OTH ER FUNCTIONS. BESIDES, HE HAD ALSO DONE SIDE BUSINESS ON PETTY SCALE, HAVING TURN-OVER IN THE VICINITY OF RS.4-5 LAC. AT THE GIVEN POINT OF TIME, HE WAS 4 1 YEARS OLD AND WAS HAVING NOMINAL INCOME BELOW TAXABLE LIMITS. THE RE- ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE HOWEVER INITIATED U/S 147/148 OF T HE ACT ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION THAT THE APPELLANT HAD DEPOSITED RS. 6, 20,000/- IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT WITH ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, LAXMANGARH. IN COMPLIANCE TO SUCH NOTICE, THE APPELLANT HAD FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME SHOWING INCOME OF RS.1,31,538/-, WHICH INCLUDED HIS INCOME FROM BU SINESS FOR RS.70,500/- AND INCOME FROM PUJA PATH ETC. FOR RS.55,200/-. IT WAS FURTHER INFORMED THAT THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.6,20,000/- AS ALLEGED IN THE REASONS. IN FACT, HE HAD DEPOSITED CASH OF RS.3,10,000/- ONL Y ON 15.6.2009 AS EVIDENT FROM THE COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT SUBMITTED HER EWITH. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ON BEING ENQUIRED ABOUT ANOTHER SAVING BANK ACCOUNT IF ANY, IT WAS INFORMED BY THE APPELLANT THAT HE HAD ANOTHER SAVING BANK ACCOUNT WITH BARODA RAJ. KHESHT RIYA GRAMIN BANK, LAXMANGARH (A/C NO. 76550100047720) BUT NO CASH WHA TSOEVER WAS DEPOSITED IN THIS BANK. THERE WAS A CREDIT ENTRY OF RS.1,30,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF LC IN THIS ACCOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, THE APP ELLANT HAD EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.3,10,000/- OUT OF HIS PAST SAVINGS AND SALE PROCEEDS DURING THE YEAR. THE LD. AO HAD HOWEVER, J UNKED SUCH EXPLANATION AND HAD PROCEEDED TO FINALIZE THE RE-AS SESSMENT PROCEEDINGS EX-PARTE U/S 144 WITHOUT POINTING OUT ANY FAILURE O N THE PART OF THE APPELLANT AND HAD ADDED THE ENTIRE CREDIT ENTRIES O F RS. 4,96,650/- (RS.3,10,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT ON 15.6.2 009 & CREDIT BALANCE OF 1,36,784/-INCLUDING OPENING CREDIT BALANCE) WITH OUT CONSIDERING THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT REGARDING HIS PAST SAVI NGS AND RECEIPT OF BANK REMITTANCE. OBVIOUSLY THE ADDITION SO MADE IN EX-PA RTE ORDER WAS BAD IN ITA NO. 1127/JP/2019 SH. UMESH KUMAR PUJARI, SIKAR VS. THE ITO, WARD 4( 1), JAIPUR 3 LAW AND DESERVED TO BE QUASHED SUMMARILY. ACCORDING LY, AN APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A)-2, JAIPUR. 3. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED BY THE LD AR THAT THE L D. CIT (A) HAD ALSO DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN SKEPTICAL MANNER WITHOUT AD DRESSING THE POINTS AT ISSUE IN RIGHT PERSPECTIVE AND WITHOUT EXAMINING TH E CREDIT ENTRIES CRITICALLY WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS VIDE PARA 2.3 OF THE AP PELLATE ORDER: I HAVE PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSME NT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT. GROUND NO.1 T O 04 WHICH ARE INTERRELATED ARE BEING TAKEN UP TOGETHER. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THERE IS A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.6,20,000/- IN TH E ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND CREDIT OF RS.1,36,784/- IN BARODA RAJ ASTHAN KSHETERIYAN GRAMIN BANK. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN GRO SS RECEIPT OF RS. 4,62650/-. IT IS FURTHER NOTICED THAT OUT OF DE POSIT OF RS.6,20,000/- DEPOSIT OF RS.3,10,000/- WAS MADE ONL Y ON 15.6.2009. CONSIDERING THIS, ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER ALLOWING PROPORTIONATE CREDIT OF SALES REALIZATION, TREATED DIFFERENCE OF RS.4,96,650/- AS UNDISCLOSED CASH DEPOSITED IN THE SAME BANK ACCOUN T. LT. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THIS REPRESENTS THE B USINESS RECORDS, PAST SAVING AND L.C. PAYMENT RECEIVED. ON PERUSAL OF OVERALL FACTS, I FIND THAT THE APPELL ANT HAS NOT FILED ANY PROPER DOCUMENTS PROVING THAT AMOUNT DEPO SITED IN BANK IS OUT OF BUSINESS RECEIPTS/OLD SAVING. REGARDING CRED IT OF RS.1,30,000/- THE NARRATION IN BANK ACCOUNT IS L.C. WHICH DOES NO T MEAN THAT THIS IS AN EXEMPT RECEIPT. THEREFORE, ASSESSING OFFICER CORRECTLY TREATED THE BANK DEPOSIT OF RS.4,96,650/- AS UNEXPLAINED. HENCE, THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. ITA NO. 1127/JP/2019 SH. UMESH KUMAR PUJARI, SIKAR VS. THE ITO, WARD 4( 1), JAIPUR 4 4. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD AR THAT ON GOING THRO UGH THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS NOTED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS INCO RRECTLY TAKEN THE FIGURES OF THE 'CASH DEPOSITS' AT RS.6,20,000/- INSTEAD OF ACT UAL CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.3,10,000/-. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT ON THE BASIS OF THE INCORRECT FIGURES OF BANK DEPOSIT, THE WORKING OF THE ADDITION IS FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY INCORRECT AND DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. A GAIN, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS INCORRECTLY OBSERVED THAT THE LD. AO HAD ALLOWED C REDIT OF THE PAST SAVINGS AND SALE PROCEEDS OF BUSINESS GOODS PROPORTIONATEL Y TO ARRIVE AT THE ADDITION OF RS.4,96,650/-. ON GOING THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT O RDER, IT IS NOTED THAT WHILE TAKING CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 3,10,000/-, THE LD . AO HAD ADDED CREDIT ENTRIES OF INTEREST AND LC INCORRECTLY WITHOUT APPR ECIATING THE EXACT NATURE OF THESE CREDIT ENTRIES. THUS THE LD. CIT (A) HAS MISC ONSTRUED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON T HE BASIS OF INCORRECT FACTS AND FIGURES. THUS THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT (A) ARE ASSAILED ON THE FOLLOWING COUNTS: (I) THE ACTUAL CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK DURING THE YEAR IS RS.3,10,000/-AND NOT RS.6,20,000/- AS TAKEN BY THE LD. CIT (A) WHILE CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,96,650/- MADE BY T HE LD. AO. (II) THE LD. AO HAD INCORRECTLY WORKED OUT THE FIGURES O F RS.4,96,650/- BY ADDING THE CREDIT FIGURES ON ACCOU NT OF INTEREST OF RS. 35,786/- & RS.14,080/- APPEARING IN BANK ACCOUN T OF ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, AND OPENING CREDIT BALANCE OF RS. 6,472/- APPEARING IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF BARODA RAJ. KIHETE RIYAN GRAMIN BANK AND RS.1,30,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF BANK TRANSFER ON 6.1.2010. NO CASH DEPOSIT WAS MADE IN BARODA RAJ. KSHETERIYAN GRAMIN BANK AS PER COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED HEREWITH. IN F ACT, DURING THIS YEAR, THE APPELLANT HAD DEPOSITED ONLY RS.3,10,000/ - IN CASH. BALANCE WAS CREDIT ENTRIES ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST, THE OPENING CREDIT BALANCE AND TRANSFER ENTRY ON ACCOUNT OF THE FUNDS ITA NO. 1127/JP/2019 SH. UMESH KUMAR PUJARI, SIKAR VS. THE ITO, WARD 4( 1), JAIPUR 5 TRANSFERRED TO THE APPELLANT FOR PERFORMING RELIGIO US FUNCTIONS ETC. (108 HAWAN KUNDS IN DESI GHEE ETC.). IN THE RETURN, THE APPELLANT HAD SHOWN INCOME OF RS. 55,200/- FROM TH IS SOURCE. (III) REGARDING SOURCE OF THE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.3, 10,000/- THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ADMITTED THE FACT THAT THE P ART OF SUCH DEPOSITS COULD BE MADE OUT OF THE PAST SAVINGS AND THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE BUSINESS GOODS DURING THE YEAR. CONSIDERING THESE F ACTS, THEY HAVE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION RS.4,96,650/- OUT OF THE ALL EGED DEPOSITS OF RS.8,17,000/- (CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.6,20,000/- AND TH E ALLEGED CREDIT ENTRIES OF RS.1,87,000/-) (I.E ABOUT 50% OF THE ALL EGED DEPOSITS AND CREDIT ENTRIES ETC.) THUS THEY HAVE GIVEN CREDIT OF RS. 3,20,000/- OUT OF PAST SAVINGS AND SALE PROCEEDS OF THE BUSINESS G OODS. THUS THE SOURCE OF THESE DEPOSITS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.3,20,0 00/- WERE FOUND TO BE SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELO W. IN VIEW OF ABOVE FACTS AND DISCUSSIONS, THE ACTUAL CASH DEPOSIT OF R S.3,20,000/- STANDS SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED AS PER ABOVE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. AS SUCH THE ADDITION OF RS.4,96,650/-AS CONFIRMED B Y THE LD. CIT (A) DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 5. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN SOURCE OF DEPOSITS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. IT WAS SUBM ITTED THAT THE NOTICE U/S 148 WAS INITIALLY ISSUED ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 6,20,000/- IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT WHICH HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THEREAFTER, DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER EXAMINED THE BANK STATEMENT OF TWO BANK ACC OUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FOUND THAT THERE IS A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 3,10,000/- AND THERE IS CREDIT OF RS. 49,866/- IN ASSESSEES ACCOU NT MAINTAINED WITH ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE AND BESIDES THAT, THERE ARE CREDIT S OF RS. 1,36,784/- IN ANOTHER BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH BARODA RAJ. KS HETERIYAN GRAMIN BANK. ITA NO. 1127/JP/2019 SH. UMESH KUMAR PUJARI, SIKAR VS. THE ITO, WARD 4( 1), JAIPUR 6 IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSE E HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CREDIT IN HIS BANK ACCOUNTS, AN AMOUNT OF RS. 4,96,650/- WAS BROUGHT TO TAX IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSES. HE ACCORDI NGLY SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT PURSUANT TO NOTIC E U/S 148, ASSESSEE HAS FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME DISCLOSING GROSS BUSINES S RECEIPTS OF RS. 4,62,700/- BESIDES OTHER INCOME IN THE FORM OF INTEREST RECEIP TS, INCOME FROM POOJA PATH AND OTHER MISC. RECEIPTS AMOUNTING TO RS. 61,0 38/-. THEREFORE, BUSINESS AND OTHER RECEIPTS TOTALING TO RS. 5,23,738/- HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME. ON PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, WE FIND THAT THERE ARE 3 CREDIT ENTRIES OF RS. 35,786/, 14,080/- AND 3,10,000/- (CA SH DEPOSIT) TOTALING TO RS. 3,59,866/-. FURTHER, THERE IS A CREDIT ENTRY IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH BARODA RAJASTHAN KSHETERIYAN GRAMIN BANK AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,30,000/-. THEREFORE, AS AGAINST THE TOTAL GRO SS RECEIPTS OF RS 523,738/- DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME, T HE TOTAL CREDIT IN THE ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT COMES TO RS. 4,89,866/-. T HEREFORE, THE EXPLANATION OF ASSESSEE THAT THE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS . 3,10,000/- IS OUT OF THE BUSINESS RECEIPTS IS FOUND TO BE REASONABLE. THEREF ORE, WHERE THE VERY BASIS OF REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WHEREIN THE CASH DEP OSITS OF RS. 3,10,000/- (WRONGLY MENTIONED AS RS. 6,20,000/- ) HAS BEEN DULY EXPLAINED AND THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS FO UND REASONABLE AND ALSO THE FACT THAT BUSINESS RECEIPTS OF RS. 4,62,700/- A ND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS INCLUDING INTEREST RECEIPT OF RS. 61,038/- SO DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE AND CORRESPONDS TO CREDITS IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT, WE DO NOT SEE ANY BASIS FOR MAKING FU RTHER ADDITION OF RS. 4,96,650/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREF ORE, IN LIGHT OF THE FACTS ITA NO. 1127/JP/2019 SH. UMESH KUMAR PUJARI, SIKAR VS. THE ITO, WARD 4( 1), JAIPUR 7 AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 02/07/2020 * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SH. UMESH KUMAR PUJARI, SIKAR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 1127/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR