ITO, UDAIPUR V. Smt. Neha Shekhawat, UDAIPUR

ITA 12/JODH/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3137 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N A JOSHI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Salary income; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.12 /JODH/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 PAN: BHXPS 3215 C THE ITO VS. SMT. NEHA SHEKHAWAT WARD- 2 (1) 10, JEEVAN TARA RESORT UDAIPUR GOVERDHAN VILAS, UDAIPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI N.A. JOSHI APPELLANT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 11-06-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12-06-2013 ORDER PER HARI OM MARATHA, JM THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), UDAIPUR DATED 18-10-2012, WAS HE ARD EX-PARTE WHEN NO ONE CAME TO REPRESENT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE RESPONDENT NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS RECEIVED. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE, AS INDIVIDUAL, FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME (ROI) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 DECLARING HER TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,79,300/- FROM HER SALARY (OF RS. 2,28,000/-) RECEIVED FROM M/S SHEKHAWATI FILLING STATION, DABOK (UDAIPUR) AND INCOME FROM OTHER SOUR CES (AT RS. 51,800/-) APART FROM DISCLOSING AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 1,80,000-. AS AGAINST THE ABOVE, HER TOTAL INCOME HAS BEEN COMPUTED AT RS. 42,80,500/- AS UNDER:- 1.SALARY INCOME RS. 3,00,000/- 2. INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES RS. 2,00,000/- 3. UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE RS. 35,0 0,000/- OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY (INCLUSIVE REGISTRY EXPENSES) 2 4. CLAIM MADE UNDER CHAPTER VI-I RS. 1,00,500/- 5. UNEXPLAINED INCOME SHOWN UNDER RS. 1,80,000/- THE HEAD OF AGRICULTURAL. ______________ TOTAL RS. 42,80,500/- 2.1 AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE FILED FIRST APPEAL AND LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN MAJOR RELIEF BY DELETING ESTIMATED ADDITION MADE IN THE SALARY OF R S. 72,000/-, ASSESSEE DECLARED SALARY OF RS. 2,28,000/- AS AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER HAS ESTIMATED IT AT RS. 3.00 LAKH. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 2.00 LAK HS MADE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES . HE HAS ALSO DELETED ADDITION OF RS . 35.00 LAKHS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF IMMOVABLE PRO PERTY. HE HAS ALSO DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,80,000/- MADE AFTER REDUCING AGRI CULTURAL INCOME. APART FROM THE ABOVE, HE HAS REDUCED ADDITION OF RS. 1,00,500/- MADE AFTE R DISALLOWING CLAIM U/S 80C(2) OF THE ACT TO RS. 1.00 LAKH. 2.2 THE REVENUE IS NOW AGGRIEVED AND HAS ASSAILED A LL THESE ABOVE ADDITIONS WHICH ARE MADE BY RELYING ON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, BY CONTENDING THAT THE CONDIT IONS LAID DOWN IN THIS RULE HAVE NOT BEEN SATISFIED AND HENCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE CANNOT BE RELIED ON. 2.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AT LENGTH. WE HAVE FO UND THAT DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A VIDE LETTER DATED 12-06-2012. IN FACT, THIS IS A LETTER CONTAIN ING MOSTLY THE SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND VERY LI TTLE ABOUT THE EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH THE SUBMISSIONS. THE LD. CIT (A) DID SEND THIS LETTER TO ASSESSING OFFICER AND HE HAS REPLIED THIS LETTER WHICH HAS BE EN FURTHER REPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE. WHAT WE HAVE NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS IN FACT NOT PASSED ANY ORDER ADMITTING THE ALLEGED EVIDENCE AS TO WHAT ARE THOSE PIECES OF EVIDENCE. ( THE WORD EVIDENCE IS USED BOTH AS SINGULAR AND PLURAL). THEREFORE, WE ARE IN AGREEMEN T WITH LD. DR AND ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THIS MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A), IN THE INTEREST OF 3 JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, WE ALLOW THIS APPEAL FOR STAT ISTICAL PURPOSES AND DIRECT THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FILED UND ER RULE 46A AS PER LAW AND THEN TAKE A CALL ON MERITS OF THE CASE UNDER THE LAW. 2.4 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 12-0 6-2013.) SD/- SD/- (R.C. SHARMA) (HARI OM MARATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 12 TH JUNE, 2013 MISHRA COPY TO:- 1.THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE LD. CIT 4. THE LD. CIT(A) 5. THE DR 6. THE GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, JODHPUR