Kavithasri Kumar, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 1200/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8348 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 26-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DURAI
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Source of fund

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH : CHENNAI , . ! '# BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1200/MDS./2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 MRS.KAVITHA SRIKUMAR, NO.1,19 TH STREET, KAMARAJ NAGAR, THIRUVANMIYUR,CHENNAI-41. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD 16(4), CHENNAI. [PAN AINPK 9724 C ] ( $% / APPELLANT) ( &'$% /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.S.SRIDHAR,ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MR.DURAIPANDIAN,JCIT,DR / DATE OF HEARING : 26 - 0 9 - 201 6 !' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07 - 10 - 2016 ( / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-4(I/C),CH ENNAI DATED 26.02.2015 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. ITA NO.1200 /MDS./2015 :- 2 -: 2. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGA RD TO SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF ` 26,12,000/- TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT WITH BANK ACCOUNT. 3. THERE WAS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS TO THE TUNE OF ` 26,12,000/-, WHICH WAS LATER CONVERTED INTO MUTUAL FUND AND IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS:- THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF FUNDS BEFORE THE AO. HENCE THE ADDITION WAS MADE TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED SOU RCE OF INCOME FOR THE CASH DEPOSITS IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT. AGGRI EVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). 3.1 ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A)DISPOSED THESE APPEAL WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS:- 5.1 --- IT IS SEEN FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER TH AT THE AO HAS ELABORATELY DEALT THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE APPEAL IN THE RELEVANT PARAGRAPHS. SINCE THE APPELLANT COULD NOT CO-RELAT E THE SORUCES FOR CASH DEPOSIT INVESTMENT DATE OF CASH DEPOSIT AMOUNT IN RS. DATE OF INVESTMENT AMOUNT IN RS. NATURE OF INVESTMENT 20.8.2010 65,000 04.9.2010 2,00,000 RELIANCE MIP 23.9.2010 20,00,000 5.10.2010 20,00,000 HDFC MIP 28.10.2010 1,12,000 01.11.2010 1,50,000 PAYMENT TO SBRI RELATORS 5.1.2011 1,25,000 8.1.2010 1,50,000 PAYMENT TO SBRI RELATORS 03.3.2011 3,10,000 8.3.2011 1,96,045 PAYMENT TO SBRI RELATORS TOTAL 26,12,000 ITA NO.1200 /MDS./2015 :- 3 -: THE CASH DEPOSITS WITH ANY COGENT EVIDENCE, THE AO HAS TREATED THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED SOURCE OF INCOME AND BROUGHT TO TAX. EVEN DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ALSO THE APPELLANT FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CASH DEPOSITS OF ` 26,12,000/- WITH ANY EVIDENCE. THEREFORE, THE ACTION OF THE AO IN TREATING THE CAS H DEPOSITS OF ` 26,12,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED SOURCE OF INCOME IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), NOW THE ASSE SSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE MAIN CONTENTION OF LD.A.R IS THAT TH E ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) IS VERY NON-SPEAKING AND HE HAS NOT RECOR DED ALL THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.A.R. FURTHER, LD.A.R SUBMITTE D THAT LD.CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOT GIVEN ANY FINDINGS ON THE BASIS OF WHI CH HE HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OF FICER. ADMITTEDLY, THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) IS VERY CRYPTIC. THE LD.CIT( A) HAS NOT PASSED SPEAKING ORDER. HE HAS NOT CONSIDERED ALL THE SUBMI SSIONS OF THE LD.A.R AS THE LD.A.R ALTERNATIVELY REQUESTED THE LD .CIT(A) TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEFOR E THE AO. HOWEVER, THE LD.CIT(A) IN A SUMMARY MANNER ENDORSED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT ASCERTAINING ANY REAS ONS. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE MATTE R SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) FOR FRESH AD JUDICATION AND HE IS DIRECTED TO PASS SPEAKING ORDER AFTER AFFORDING REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY ITA NO.1200 /MDS./2015 :- 4 -: OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND HE SHALL CONSIDER T HE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND DECIDE IT AFRESH. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 07 TH OCTOBER, 2016, AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( . ) ( G.PAVAN KUMAR ) ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED: 07 TH OCTOBER, 2016 K S SUNDARAM &'(()*( +* / COPY TO: ( 1 . / APPELLANT 3. ( ,(- . / CIT(A) 5. */0 (1 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. ( , / CIT 6. 02(3 / GF