C.Arumugam, CHENNAI V. ACIT, Trichy

ITA 1282/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4429 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 25-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M M BHUSARI
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Section: 263; 63

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 1281/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI AVATHAN SURESH KUMAR, C/O. S. SRIDHAR, A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATES, NEW NO.14, OLD NO.82, FLAT NO.5, 1 ST AVENUE, INDIRA NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI 600 020. PAN: AGEPS4915J V. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE III, TRICHY. ( ! /APPELLANT) ( '# ! /RESPONDENT) & ./ ITA NO. 1282/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI C. ARUMUGAM, C/O. S. SRIDHAR, A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATES, NEW NO.14, OLD NO.82, FLAT NO.5, 1 ST AVENUE, INDIRA NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI 600 020. PAN: ACYPA3042Q V. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE III, TRICHY. ( ! /APPELLANT) ( '# ! /RESPONDENT) & ./ ITA NO. 1283/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SMT. S. MAHESWARI, C/O. S. SRIDHAR, A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATES, NEW NO.14, OLD NO.82, FLAT NO.5, 1 ST AVENUE, INDIRA NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI 600 020. PAN: AAIPM6651M V. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE III, TRICHY. ( ! /APPELLANT) ( '# ! /RESPONDENT) 2 I.T.A. NOS. 1281 TO 1284/MDS/2016 & ./ ITA NO. 1284/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI AVATHAN RAMESH KUMAR, C/O. S. SRIDHAR, A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATES, NEW NO.14, OLD NO.82, FLAT NO.5, 1 ST AVENUE, INDIRA NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI 600 020. PAN: ACFPR5984D V. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE III, TRICHY. ( ! /APPELLANT) ( '# ! /RESPONDENT) ! $ /APPELLANTS BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE '# ! $ /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.M. BHUSARI, C IT $ /DATE OF HEARING : 26.04.2017 $ /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.05.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THESE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX, CENTRAL-2, CHENNAI DATED 24.03.2016 UNDER SECTION 2 63 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. SHRI S. SRIDHAR, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEES FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, DISCLOSING RS.11,81,455/-, RS.18,06,8 13/-, 3 I.T.A. NOS. 1281 TO 1284/MDS/2016 RS.11,79,041/- AND RS.28,16,067/- RESPECTIVELY. D URING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOU ND THAT THE ASSESSEES HAVE DEPOSITED RS.7.13 CRORES, RS.2.33 CR ORES, RS.3.7 CRORES AND RS.4.8 CRORES IN AXIS BANK AND ICICI BAN K RESPECTIVELY. THE ASSESSEES EXPLAINED BEFORE THE AO, MONEY RECEIV ED FROM CLOSED LOAN WAS USED FOR GIVING NEW LOANS AND THE D EPOSIT WAS MADE ON ROTATION OF CAPITAL. THE AO AFTER CONSIDER ING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM PETROL BUNK FOUND THAT CAPITAL AV AILABLE FOR MONEY LENDING BUSINESS WOULD BE RS.60 LAKHS, ACCORD INGLY MADE ADDITION OF ONLY RS.5 LAKHS AND THE RETURN OF THE A SSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED. THEREFORE THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN EXERCISING HIS REVISIONAL JURISDICTION U/S.256 OF T HE ACT. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI M.M. BHUSARI, THE LD. DEPA RTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A DEPOSIT O F RS.7.13 CRORES, RS.2.33 CRORES, RS.3.7 CRORES AND RS.4.8 CR ORES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES RESPECTIVELY. THERE WAS N O DISCUSSION IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER REGARDING THE SOURCE FOR DEPOS IT OF RS.7.13 CRORES, RS.2.33 CRORES, RS.3.7 CRORES AND RS.4.8 CR ORES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES. SINCE THE AO HAS NOT EXA MINED THE SOURCE FOR DEPOSIT OF RS.7.13 CRORES, RS.2.33 CRORE S, RS.3.7 CRORES 4 I.T.A. NOS. 1281 TO 1284/MDS/2016 AND RS.4.8 CRORES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, HE FOUND THA T THE ORDER OF THE AO IS ERRONEOUS AND PRE-JUDICIAL TO THE INTERES T OF THE REVENUE. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMITTEDL Y THERE WAS A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.7.13 CRORES, RS.2.33 CRORES, RS. 3.7 CRORES AND RS.4.8 CRORES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES. THE AO HAS NOT EXAMINED THE SOURCE FOR MAKING SUCH DEPOSITS. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE MONEY RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS CLOSE D LOANS WAS USED FOR GIVING NEW LOANS. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSE ES ARE NOT MAINTAINING ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FOR MONEY LENDING BUSINESS. THEREFORE, IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE AO TO EXAMINE TH E SOURCE FOR MAKING DEPOSIT OF RS.7.13 CRORES, RS.2.33 CRORES, R S.3.7 CRORES AND RS.4.8 CRORES RESPECTIVELY. SINCE THE AO HAS NOT M ADE ANY ENQUIRY WITH REGARD TO SOURCE FOR DEPOSIT RS.7.13 CRORES, R S.2.33 CRORES, RS.3.7 CRORES AND RS.4.8 CRORES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINI ON THAT THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER HAS RIGHTLY FOUND THAT THE O RDER OF THE AO IS ERRONEOUS AND PRE-JUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE R EVENUE. THEREFORE THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER HAS RIGHTLY DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REDO THE ASSESSMENT AFTER CONDUCTING THE NECESSARY 5 I.T.A. NOS. 1281 TO 1284/MDS/2016 ENQUIRIES WITH REGARD TO SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN THE B ANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES. THEREFORE THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY. A CCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 31 ST MAY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . ) ( . . . ) (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (N.R.S. GANESA N) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, /DATED, THE 31 ST MAY, 2017. JR. /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( )/CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. !' /DR 6. #$ /GF