Smt. Nimeshaben G.Kapadia, Surat V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-1(4), Surat

ITA 1196/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1541 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 11 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 17-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH AHMEDABAD , BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA. NO.1196/AHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09) SMT. NIMESHABEN G. KAPADIA 3/2514, SALABATPURA MAIN ROAD, SALABATPURA, SURAT APPELLANT VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), SURAT RESPONDENT PAN: AGJPK0444P /BY APPELLANT : SHRI HARDIK VORA, A.R. /BY RESPONDENT :SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN, SR. D.R. /DATE OF HEARING : 17.05.2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.05.2016 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, J.M: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, SU RAT, DATED 03.04.2012 FOR A.Y. 2008-09 ON FOLLOWING GROU ND: ITA NO.1196/AHD/12 A.Y. 08-09 [NIMESHABEN G. KAPADI A VS. ITO] PAGE 2 1. AS REGARDS ADDITIONS OF RS.3,73,500/- AND RS.5,22,073/-. 1.1 THE LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUST AND PROPER ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT RS.2,98,524/- BEING 1/3 RD OF THE TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.8,95,573/- (3,73,500 + 5,22,073) IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT DESPITE CONFESSION AFFIDAVIT BY SHRI KALPESH RUPAWALA, THE FIRST ACCOUNT HOLDER. 2. IN THIS CASE, ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSI TS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK BEARI NG NO. 65010029669. THIS ACCOUNT WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE. AS PER BANK STATEME NT, THIS ACCOUNTS BELONGS TO KALPESHKUMAR GAMANLAL RUPAWALA, MINAXIBEN G RUPAWALA AND ASSESSEE. SOME DEPOSITS/WITHDRAWALS FROM BANK PERTAIN TO INVESTMEN TS IN MUTUAL FUNDS AND THEN REDEMPTION. SOME OF THESE INVESTMENTS WERE IN THE SINGLE NAME OF ASSESSEE I.E . ING OPTIMIX ASSET ALLOCATOR MULTI MANAGER FOF SCHEME (GROWTH) FOLIO NO.5016520/87, FOLIO NO. 5016533/48 ETC. IN SOME CASES, ASSESSEE IS THE FIRST APPLICANT I.E. HDFC LEGEND FUND PLAN A GROWTH FOLIO NO. 7918661/29 ETC. ITA NO.1196/AHD/12 A.Y. 08-09 [NIMESHABEN G. KAPADI A VS. ITO] PAGE 3 2.1 CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT SOME INVESTMENTS WERE IN T HE NAME OF MINAXIBEN G RUPAWALA, ALSO, KALPESH RUPAWAL AS STATEMENT OWNED UP THE ACCOUNT IN ABSENCE OF EXACT OWNERSHIP OF FUNDS AND THE ACCOUNT STANDS IN THREE NAMES, THE ADDITION MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER WAS SUSTAINE D. 2.2 THE STAND OF ASSESSEE HAS BEEN THAT ACCOUNT HAS BEEN OWNED UP BY KALPESHKUMAR GAMANLAL RUPAWALA WHEN HE ALSO DEPOSED THIS FACT BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT IN THE A SSESSMENT ORDER. IN CASE OF KALPESHKUMAR GAMANLAL RUPAWALA, WHEN HE HAS OWNED UP THE ACCOUNT, NO ADDITION HAS BEEN M ADE ON THIS BASIS. MEANING THEREBY, CREDIT DEPOSITS W ERE ACCEPTED. THIRDLY, IN THE CASE OF MINAXIBEN G RUPA WALA, THE THIRD JOINT HOLDER, NO SUCH ADDITION WAS MADE. THUS, ADDITION IN QUESTION BE DELETED. ON THE OTHER HAND , LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 2.3 AFTER GOING THROUGH RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT IT IS A CASE OF JOINT OWNERSHI P OF ACCOUNT WHEREIN CERTAIN DEPOSITS WERE MADE. IT IS UNDISPUT ED FACT THAT ONE OF THE JOINT CO-OWNER OF ACCOUNT KALPESHKUMAR GAMANLAL RUPAWALA HAS OWNED UP THE AMOUNT IN THE ITA NO.1196/AHD/12 A.Y. 08-09 [NIMESHABEN G. KAPADI A VS. ITO] PAGE 4 ACCOUNT INCLUDING WITH DEPOSITS AND HE HAS ALSO DEP OSED THIS FACT BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT WHICH IS PLACED ON PA GE NOS. 1 TO 3 OF THE PAPER BOOK. MOREOVER, THE ASSESSMENT O RDER OF KALPESHKUMAR GAMANLAL RUPAWALA HAS BEEN PLACED FOR A.Y. 2008-09 I.E. YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND PAGE NOS. 4 TO 5 WHEREIN AFTER OWNED UP THE ACCOUNT AND NO ADDI TION HAS BEEN MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT. FURTHER, THE THIRD CO- OWNER OF THE ACCOUNT, MINAXIBEN G RUPAWALA, NO SUCH ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE. SO , TAKING ALL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, NO ADDITIO N IS REQUIRED IN ASSESSEES CASE AND SAME IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 3. AS A RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 20 TH DAY OF MAY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR Y ADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 20/05/2016 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE $. %&%'( ) / CONCERNED CIT ITA NO.1196/AHD/12 A.Y. 08-09 [NIMESHABEN G. KAPADI A VS. ITO] PAGE 5 4. )- / CIT (A) ,.-./00'(1 '( 123& / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 4./5678 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 1 / 2% '( 123&