The Income Tax Officer, V. Sh. Harsimarat Singh, Kapurthala

ITA 119/ASR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0653 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHAWANI SHANKER
• Keywords: Gift

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. (CAMP AT JALANDHAR) BEFORE SH. A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.119(ASR)/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2009-10 PAN: AUUPS0715J INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SH. HARSIMRAT SINGH, KAPURTHALA-1, 15-AMAN NAGAR, KAPURTHALA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. BHAWANI SHANKER, DR RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 21/06/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23/06/2016 ORDER PER A.D. JAIN, JM; THIS IS THE REVENUES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2009-10 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2014, PASSED BY TH E LD. CIT(A), JALANDHAR, DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.42 LACS. 2. NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THOUG H NOTICE WAS SENT FOR HEARING ON 21.06.2016 BY RPAD, WHICH HAS RETURNED U NSERVED. HOWEVER, FINDING THAT THE MATTER CAN BE PROCEEDED WITH IN TH E ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE DOING SO. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASES ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A TEACHER BY PROFESSION FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 23.07.200 9 DECLARING THEREIN AN 2 ITA NO.119(A SR)./2015 AY 2009-10 INCOME OF RS.1,47,391/-. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS, THE AO NOTICED A DEPOSIT OF RS.42,00,000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF TH E ASSESSEE ON 01.11.2008 MADE VIDE CHEQUE NO. 897986, WHICH WAS ISSUED BY S H. DAVINDER SINGH OF BEGOWAL. THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE AMOUNT WAS RE CEIVED BY HIM AS TRUST MONEY FROM SH. DAVINDER SINGH. HOWEVER, THE EXPLANA TION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE AO. IN THE ABSENC E OF ANY SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION, THE AO TREATED THE AMOUNT OF RS.42,00, 000/- AS GIFT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 56(2)(V) OF THE ACT, AS THE A MOUNT WAS RECEIVED WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION AND THUS, MADE AN ADDITION OF RS .42,00,000/- TO THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION M ADE BY THE A.O. 4. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A HAS ERRED ON BOTH LAW AS WELL AS THE FACTS OF THE CASE BY DELETING THE ADDITION IN D ISPUTE. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT APPRECIATED THE FACT TH AT THE MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS INVESTED IN HIS OWN NAME AND RECEIVED INTEREST ON THOSE INVESTMENTS IN HIS OWN NAME AND HENCE, THE SAME WAS CORRECTLY TREATED AS GIFT U/S 56(2)(V) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND HAVE PERUSED THE MA TERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDE R PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN WELL REAS ONED FINDINGS WITH LOGIC IN RESPECT OF DEPOSIT OF RS.42,00,000/- IN HIS ORDER, WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY 3 ITA NO.119(A SR)./2015 AY 2009-10 INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) IS AS FOLLOWS: 6.7. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE AO A S MADE BY HIM IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS REMAND REPORT. I HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE FILED VIDE VARIOUS LETTERS AS WELL AS HIS COUNTER COMMENTS ON THE REMAND REPORTS SUBMITTED BY THE AO. ON CAREFULLY CONSIDERA TION OF THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS NO D OUBT ABOUT THE FACTUAL POSITION THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.42,00,000/- HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF SH. DAVINDER SINGH. IN HIS STATEMENT, SH. DAVINDER SINGH HAS CATEGORICALLY ADMITTED THAT HE HAS GIVEN AN AMOUNT OF RS.42,00,000/- TO THE ASSESSEE. THERE MAY BE SOME D ISCREPANCIES IN THE VERSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND SH. DAVINDER SI NGH BUT THE FACT IS THAT SH. DAVINDER SINGH HAS CATEGORICALLY ADMITT ED THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.42,00,000/- HAS BEEN GIVEN BY HIM TO T HE ASSESSEE FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE IT MAY BE IT MEANS, THE DEPOSIT OF RS.42,00,000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS EXPLAINE D. MOREOVER, THE DEPOSIT IS THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS. IN MY CONSIDE RED OPINION, WHEN SH. DAVINDER SINGH HAS CATEGORICALLY ADMITTED THAT HE HAS GIVEN MONEY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR SOME INVESTMENT, IT CANNOT BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IF SH. DAVINDER SINGH COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF SOM E DEPOSITS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT, THE ACTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN HIS CASE AND NOT THE ASSESSEE. IN MY FURTHER OPINION, THE DEPOSIT OF RS.42,00,000/- CAN ALSO NOT BE TREATED AS GIFT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE AMOUNT IS RETURNABLE TO SH. DAVINDER SINGH. 6. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FOUND AS A FACT THAT DAVINDER SINGH DEPOSED ADMITTEDLY HAVING GIVEN THE SUM OF RS. 42 LACS TO THE ASSESSEE, THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. THIS HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED. IN SUC H A SITUATION, OBVIOUSLY, THE ASSESSEES ONUS STANDS DULY DISCHARGED. 4 ITA NO.119(A SR)./2015 AY 2009-10 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMI TY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SAME IS UPHELD. ACCORDINGLY, THE AP PEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 8. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23RD JUNE, 2016. SD/- SD/- (T. S. KAPOOR) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 23/06/2016. /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE:SH.HARSIMRAT SINGH, KAPURTHALA (2) THE ITO, KAPURTHALA-1. (3) THE CIT(A), JLR (4) THE CIT, JLR (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T. TRUE COPY BY ORDER INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.