ITO, CHENNAI V. A.Anbazhagan, Chengalput

ITA 1238/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 123821714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-03-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURU BHASHYAM IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: N MUTHUKUMARAN
• Section: 143(3); 68; 6

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . . !' , # '$ % BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.1238/MDS/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 -2010) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SALARY WARD I(1), TAMBARAM CHENNAI 600 045. ( &' /APPELLANT) VS SHRI. A. ANBAZHAGAN, 314/1, NEW COLONY, 2 ND STREET, MELAMAIYUR, CHENGALPATTU 603 002. [PAN: AGBPA8768N] ( ()&' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. GURU BHASHYAM, IRS, JCIT. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. N. MUTHUKUMARAN, ADVOCATE /DATE OF HEARING : 13.03.2014 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.03.2014 '* / O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS REVENUES APPEAL ARISES FROM ORDER OF THE COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-IV, CHENNAI DATED 18.02.2013, PASSED IN ITA I.T.A.NO.1238/MDS/2013. :- 2 -: NO.509/2011-12 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010, IN PR OCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 [IN SHORT THE ACT]. 2. THE SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IN T HIS APPEAL IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING IMPUGNED ADDI TION OF H31,50,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ASSES SMENT ORDER DATED 20.12.2011. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. HE IS STATED TO B E EMPLOYED IN CHENNAI PORT TRUST. ON 14.01.2011, THE ASSESSEE HA D FILED HIS RETURN DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF H2,23,911/- WHICH WAS SU MMARILY PROCESSED. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAME D REGULAR ASSESSMENT. IN COURSE THEREOF, HE NOTICED FROM A SSESSEES SAVING ACCOUNT A SUM OF H31,50,000/- CREDITED ON 25.06.200 8 AND WITHDRAWN ON 02.07.2008. THE ASSESSEE WOULD ATTRIBUTE ITS SO URCE TO SALE OF HIS PROPERTY AT KORATTUR VIDE AGREEMENT DATED 25.06.200 8. IN SUPPORT, HE PRODUCED A COPY OF THE AGREEMENT WITH CASH RECEIPT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT AGREE. HE OBSERVED THAT IN THE PRE CEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 ALSO, THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED CAPI TAL GAINS FROM THE SAME PROPERTY. HE HELD THAT IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS , THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION FORTHCOMING ABOUT THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT ON 25.06.2008(SUPRA) SUPPORTED BY THE SALE DEED. I.T.A.NO.1238/MDS/2013. :- 3 -: ACCORDINGLY, HE MADE IMPUGNED ADDITION UNDER SECTIO N 68 OF THE ACTS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT AND COMPUTED TOTAL INCOME OF H35,73,910/-. 4. IN THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE CIT(A) HAS TAKEN NOTE OF VARIOUS INCONSISTENCIES IN ASSESSEES EXPLANATI ON. AT THE SAME TIME, HE HAS PROCEEDED TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. THE CIT(A) OBSERVES THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING CAPITAL GAINS IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR AND REGARDING SOURCE OF IMPUGNED DE POSITS MADE ON 25.06.2008, THE ASSESSEES STAND THAT THE PROPERTY SUBJECT MATTER OF CAPITAL GAINS AS WELL AS AGREEMENT DATED 25.06.2008 , IS THE SAME. HE TAKES COGNIZANCE OF THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO FINDI NG BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ABOUT ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INVESTMENT OR THA T THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF CAPITAL GAINS HAD BEEN RECEIVED IN THE YEAR 2008- 2009. PER CIT(A), THIS CONSIDERATION AMOUNT OF H32 ,00,000/- PERTAINS TO LAND AGREED TO BE SOLD IN PRECEEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR AND RECEIVED ON 25.6.2008 AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING POWER OF ATTO RNEY. IN THIS MANNER, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUCCEEDED IN LOWER APPEL LATE PROCEEDINGS. THEREFORE, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH T HE CASE FILE. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE REVENUE HAS NOT PLACED ON RE CORD ANY COGENT I.T.A.NO.1238/MDS/2013. :- 4 -: EVIDENCE TO DISPEL THE FINDING ON FACTS ARRIVED BY THE CIT(A) THAT PROPERTY IN QUESTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING C APITAL GAINS IN THE YEAR 2008-09 AND QUA POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 25.06.208(SUPRA) IS ONE AND THE SAME. THERE IS AL SO NO MATERIAL QUOTED PROVING RECEIPT OF THIS CONSIDERATION AMOUNT OF H32,00,000/- IN PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2 009. THAT BEING THE CASE, THE FACT EMERGES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD AG REED TO SELL HIS IMMOVABLE PROPERTY IN PREVIOUS ASSESSMENT YEAR; DEC LARED CAPITAL GAINS, BUT RECEIVED CONSIDERATION MONEY IN THE IMPU GNED ASSESSMENT YEAR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING POWER OF A TTORNEY. MOREOVER, THE REVENUE DOES NOT ARGUE THAT ANY SALE DEED HAD BEEN EXECUTED IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 WHICH WOUL D FALSIFY POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 25.06.2008. IN THESE CIRCU MSTANCES, WE HOLD THAT THIS SUM OF H31,50,000/- DEPOSITED ON 25. 06.2008 CANNOT BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT UNDER SECTION 6 8 OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, WE AFFIRM THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A). 6. IN RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISM ISSED. I.T.A.NO.1238/MDS/2013. :- 5 -: ORDER PRONOUNCED ON TUESDAY, THE 18TH OF MARCH, 20 14, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE PRESIDENT (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:18 TH MARCH, 2014. K.V. COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR