Sangeet Gupta, New Delhi V. ITO, Ward-62(4), New Delhi

ITA 121/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4667 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-01-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L ANURAGI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. T. S. KAPOOR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 121 /DEL/2019 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2010 - 1 1 SANGEET GUPTA, L/H SHRI PURSHOTTAM DASS, A - 3 8, SHANKAR GARDEN, VIKAS PURI, NEW DELHI - 110018 VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 62(4), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A FYPD2762F ASSESSEE BY : SMT. RANO JAIN, ADV. & SH. PRANSHU SINGHAL, CA REVENUE BY : SH . S. L. ANURAGI , SR. DR DATE OF HEAR ING: 28 . 05 .201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 31 .05 .201 9 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 20 , NEW DELHI DATED 30.08 .2018 . 2. THE AS SESSEE HAS TAKEN LEGAL AS WELL AS MERITS OF THE ADDITIONS SUSTAINED BY LD. CIT(A) BUT DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. AR DID NOT ARGUE ANYTHING ON THE LEGAL ISSUES AND ON MERITS THERE IS ONLY ONE ADDITION OF RS.2,80,000/ - WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAD MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSITS IN THE BANK. 3. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED AN AMOUNT OF RS.2,80,000/ - ON 16.03.2010 AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD WITHDRAWN RS.1,50,000/ - ON 06.03.2010, RS.1,00,000/ - ON 04. 03.2010, RS.1,00,000/ - ON 26.02.2010 AND RS.5,00,000/ - ON 25.02.2010 AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED THE ITA NO . 121 /DEL /201 9 SANGEET GUPTA 2 AMOUNT OF RS.2,80,000/ - , O UT OF CASH AVAILABLE WITH HIM WHICH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAD WRONGLY DENIED. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS NOTED DOWN THE CASH WITHDRAWALS IN HIS ORDER BUT UPHELD THE ADDITION ONLY ON THE BASIS THAT ASSESSEE MUST HAVE UTILIZED THE WITHDRAWN AMOUNT FOR HIS BUSINESS PURPOSES. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT IT IS WRONG ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE AUTHORITIES TO HOLD TH AT ASSESSEE HAD UTILIZED THE WITHDRAWALS TO SOME OTHER SPECIFIC PURPOSES. RELIANCE IN THIS RESPECT WAS PLACED ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: SR. VENKATA RATNAM VS CIT (1981) 127 ITR 807 ACIT VS BALDEV RAJ CHARLA AND OTHERS 121 TTJ 366 CIT VS KULWANT RAI (2007 ) 291 ITR 36 DCIT VS SHRI NIKHIL NANDA IN ITA NO. 3644/DEL/2013 M/S MOONGIPA INVESTMENT LTD. VS ITO IN ITA NO. 2605/DEL/2007 ANIL GUPTA VS ITO IN ITA NO. 5645/DEL/2013 4 . THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE , ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED ON THE ORDER OF AUTHO RITIES BELOW. 5 . I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD . IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAD WITHDRAWN THE FOLLOWING AMOUNTS FROM HER BANK ACCOUNT WHICH LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO NOTED IN HIS ORDER: 25.02.2010 RS.5,00,000/ - 26.02.2010 RS.1,00,000/ - 04.03.2010 RS.1,00,000/ - 05.03.2010 RS.20,000/ - 06.03.2010 RS.1,50,000/ - 6 . THE LAST WITHDRAWALS OF RS.1,50,000/ - WAS ON 06.03.2010 AND THERE WAS ANOTHER WITHDRAWAL OF RS.1,00,000/ - ON 04.03.2010. THESE W ITHDRAWALS SUFFICIENTLY COVER THE DEPOSITS MADE BY A SSESSEE IN HER BANK ACCOUNT ON 1 6.03.2010. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAS N OT POINTED OUT ANY SPECIFIC USE OF WITHDRAWALS MADE BY ASSESSEE DURING EARLIER OCCASIONS AND THESE CONTINUED TO REMAIN PART OF CASH IN HAND AND THEREFORE, THE ITA NO . 121 /DEL /201 9 SANGEET GUPTA 3 ACTION OF AUTHORITIES BELOW IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED . (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 31 ST DAY OF MAY , 2019 AT NEW DEL HI) SD/ - ( T. S. KAPOOR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31 /0 5 /2019 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(APPEALS) 5 . DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR