SHRI MITESH CHANDRA KAUSHIK, JAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, CHURU

ITA 1238/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5932 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 31-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANMOHAN KANDPAL ACIT DHK
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH JES'K LH 'KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA -@ ITA NO. 1238/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'KZ@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI MITESH CHANDRA KAUSHIK, 407, DBC TOWER, OPP-HOTEL GANGAUR, NEAR PINKCITY PETROL PUMP, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. I.T.O., WARD-2, CHURU. LFKK;H YS[KK LA -@THVKBZVKJ LA -@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABSPK 7023 L VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C. PARWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI MANMOHAN KANDPAL (ACIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 20/11/2019 MN?KKS 'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/11/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A)-3, JAIPUR DATED 24/08/2018 FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10 IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT). 2. IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND OF DELAY OF 502 DAYS IN FILING THE ITA 1238/JP/2018 SHRI MITESH CHANDRA KAUSHIK VS ITO 2 APPEAL BEFORE HIM. THE LD AR HAS EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR DELAY BUT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE REASONS AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY NOT CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. 3. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND FOUND FROM THE RECORD THAT THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE A.O. IN RESPECT OF THE CASH AMOUNT FOUND TO BE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. AT THE ADVICE OF HIS COUNSEL, THE ASSESSEE ACCEPTED THE ADDITION AND DID NOT FILE THE APPEAL. SUBSEQUENTLY, IT CAME TO NOTICE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNT SO DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS WITHDRAWN FROM HIS ANOTHER BANK ACCOUNT. OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO THE STATEMENT OF BANK ACCOUNT OF CITY BANK WHEREFROM THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN RS. 9.00 LACS IN CASH ON 22/11/2008 AND RS. 8.00 LACS ON 24/11/2008. WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT, THE A.O. HAS POINTED OUT THAT ON 24/11/2008, THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS. 17.00 LACS IN HIS SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT NO. 66747 OF UNION BANK OF INDIA, THE SOURCE OF WHICH COULD NOT BE EXPLAINED. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF BANK STATEMENT OF CITY BANK SHOWING THE RESPECTIVE WITHDRAWALS OF CASH WAS ALSO FURNISHED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (IN SHORT, THE RULES), ITA 1238/JP/2018 SHRI MITESH CHANDRA KAUSHIK VS ITO 3 HOWEVER, HE DID NOT ACCEPT THE SAME AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD, I FOUND THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL WAS ON REASONABLE GROUND. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ON RECORD THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF AVAILABILITY OF CASH THROUGH WITHDRAWAL FROM HIS OWN BANK ACCOUNT, IN ALL FAIRNESS, I RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF A.O. FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERING THE BANK STATEMENT OF CITY BANK SO FILED BY THE ASSESSEE INDICATING WITHDRAWAL OF CASH ON THE RESPECTIVE DATES OF DEPOSIT. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST NOVEMBER, 2019 SD/- JES'K LH 'KEKZ ( RAMESH C SHARMA ) YS[KK LNL; @ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 21 ST NOVEMBER, 2019 *RANJAN ITA 1238/JP/2018 SHRI MITESH CHANDRA KAUSHIK VS ITO 4 VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI MITESH CHANDRA KAUSHIK, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE I.T.O., WARD-2, CHURU. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 1238/JP/2018) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR