Shri Mahendra Bhikhalal Bhavsar, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 132/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7347 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 20-01-2020
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: L P JAIN
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Unexplained investment
• Section: 69; 148

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 132/AHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHR I MAHENDRA BHIKHALAL BHAVSAR, 2, SHIVPATH APARTMENT, RAMAN NAGAR, MANINAGAR, AHMEDABAD-380008 PAN : AALPB 1331 J VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(2)(2), AHMEDABAD / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MAHESH CHHAJED, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI L P JAIN, SR DR / DATE OF HEARING : 20/01/2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29/01/2020 / O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT :- THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-4, AHMEDABAD DATED 30 TH NOVEMBER 2016 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN FO UR GROUNDS OF APPEAL, OUT OF WHICH GROUND NOS. 1 AND 4 ARE GENERAL GROUND S OF APPEAL WHICH DO NOT CALL FOR RECORDING OF ANY SPECIFIC FINDINGS. 2. IN GROUND NO.2, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED REOP ENING OF ASSESSMENT BY ISSUANCE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE INCO ME-TAX ACT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ELECTRONICALLY ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER 2008 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.4,30,830/-. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS R ECORDED REASONS FOR REOPENING AND THEREAFTER ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SECTIO N 148 OF THE INCOME-TAX ITA NO. 132/AHD/2017 SHRI MAHENDRA BHIKHALAL BHAVSAR VS. ITO AY : 2008-09 2 ACT ON 01.03.2013. THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER ARE AVAILABLE ON PAGE NO. 30 OF THE PAPER-BOOK. RELEVA NT PART HAS ALSO BEEN REPRODUCED BY THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ON PAGE NO. 3 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WHICH READS AS UNDER:- THE LD. A.O. HAS RECORDED REASONS FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT IS REPRODUCED HERE UNDER. INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM ITO WARD 14(2), AHMED ABAD THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF HIS ASSESSEE SMT. SHARMISHTHABEN M BHAVSAR, IT WAS NOTICED THAT AIR I NFORMATION WAS RECEIVED IN HER CASE REGARDING PURCHASE OF IMMOVABL E PROPERTY I HER NAME, HER HUSBAND SHRI MAHENDRA M BHAVSAR WHO IS PRACTICI NG ADVOCATE HAS MADE PAYMENT OF RS. 12 LACS OUT OF CASH AVAILABLE WITH H IM. IT WAS ALSO REPORTED BY THE ITO WARD (2), AHMEDABAD THAT SHRI MAHENDRA B. B HAVSAR ALONG WITH HIS WIFE AND SON CHANAKVA M BHAVSAR IS MAINTAINING AN SB ACCOUNT NO. 701520100557698 WITH SYNDICATE BANK, KHOKHARA BRANC H, AHMEDABAD. ON VERIFICATION OF THE SAID SB ACCOUNT IT IS NOTICED T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 23,47,927/- DURING F.Y. 2007-08 RELEVANT TO A.Y. 2008- 09. ON VERIFICATION OF ITS DATA IT IS NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED THE ABOVE, JOINT BANK ACCOUNT WITH SYNDICATE BANK, KHOK HARA BRANCH, AHMEDABAD TO THE DEPARTMENT. THEREFORE THE CASH DEP OSIT OF RS. 23, 47,927/- DURING THE F.Y. 2007-08 IN SB ACCOUNT NO.7015201005 5769 IS NOTHING BUT THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH THE AS SESSEE NEVER INTENDED TO DISCLOSE TO THE DEPARTMENT.' 4. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, WHILE IMPU GNING THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, CONTENDED THAT AGAINST THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT, ASSESSEE HAS FILED OBJECTIONS VIDE LETT ER DATED 20 TH JANUARY 2014. SUCH OBJECTIONS ARE BEING PLACED ON PAGE NO. 31 TO 37 OF THE PAPER-BOOK. HE POINTED OUT THAT THESE OBJECTIONS HAVE BEEN CONSIDE RED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT REJECTED. TAKING US THROUGH THE OBJECTIONS AS WELL AS COPY OF THE REASONS, HE CONTENDED THAT BASICALLY LE ARNED ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT A SUM OF RS. 23,47,927/- WERE FOUND T O BE DEPOSITED IN CASH IN A SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WITH SYNDICATE BANK. THE AS SESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THIS BANK ACCOUNT WAS NOT DISCLOSED B Y THE ASSESSEE AND, ITA NO. 132/AHD/2017 SHRI MAHENDRA BHIKHALAL BHAVSAR VS. ITO AY : 2008-09 3 THEREFORE, IT IS AN UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND ASSESSEE HAS NEVER ANY INTENTION TO DISCLOSE IT TO THE DEPARTMENT. QUA THIS REASONI NG, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT IS FACTUALLY INCORRE CT. FOR THE PRESENT YEAR OF ASSESSMENT I.E. THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION, ASSESSEE COULD ONLY DISCLOSE ONE BANK ACCOUNT IN WHICH HE ENTITLED TO G ET HIS REFUND. THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT TO DISCLOSE ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS. IN THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS, THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS AN D COPY OF SUCH AUDIT REPORT IS AVAILABLE IN THE PAPER-BOOK. HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE NO. 61 OF THE PAPER-BOOK WHEREIN FOLLOWING DETAILS ARE MEN TIONED:- MAHENDRA BHAVSAR & CO (FROM 1-APR-2007) 201, TO 204, ATMA HOUSE, OPP. LA-GAJJAR ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDBAD-380009 BANK ACCOUNTS GROUP SUMMARY 1-APR-2007 TO 31-MAR-2008 CLOSING BALANCE DEBIT CREDIT DENA BANK A/C. 111-1706 [CURRENT] 86,057.50 GUJARAT MER BANK A/C 2023 [CURRENT] 11,378.00 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK 21/684 3,186.50 SYNDICATE BANK A/C 101/2314 [CURRENT] 64,107.00 SYNDICATE BANK A/C 55679 CLIENT A/C 25,989.21 GRAND TOTAL 1,90,718.21 A COPY OF ACCOUNT NO. 55679 HAS DULY BEEN DISCLOSE D ALONG WITH CLOSING BALANCE. THUS, ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS INCORRECT AT THE END OF THE REVENUE TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO INTENTION TO DISCLOSE THIS ACCOUNT AND THAT ASSESSE E HAS NOT DISCLOSED THIS ACCOUNT TO THE REVENUE. ACCORDING TO THE REQUIRED RULES, HE HAS DISCLOSED THIS ACCOUNT. HE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE RE OPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT IS BAD IN LAW AND IT IS REQUIRED TO BE Q UASHED. ITA NO. 132/AHD/2017 SHRI MAHENDRA BHIKHALAL BHAVSAR VS. ITO AY : 2008-09 4 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE RELIED UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS ORDER OF THE LEARNE D CIT(A). HE CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS REOPENED THE ASSESSM ENT AFTER DUE VERIFICATION OF THE INCOME-TAX DATA OF THE ASSESSEE . 6. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AN D GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. A PERUSAL OF THE REASONS WOULD I NDICATE THAT A SUM OF RS.23,47,927/- WERE DEPOSITED IN ONE OF THE JOINT S AVINGS BANK ACCOUNTS IN CASH. A CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK WOULD NOT A PER SE ESCAPED INCOME. IT CAN BE FROM EXPLAINED SOURCES. THEREFORE, MERELY SOME C ASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT HARBOURED A B ELIEF THAT THE INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THE QUESTION IN THIS CASE I S THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS VERIFIED THIS CASH DEPOSIT WITH ITS DAT A AND ON THE PERUSAL OF THAT DATA HE FOUND THAT VOLUME OF TRANSACTIONS AND THESE TRANSACTIONS ARE NOT REFLECTING IN ITS DATA OF THE ASSESSEE. WHEN T HE ASSESSE HAS FILED OBJECTIONS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AGAINST THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT, THEN WHILE CONSIDERING THE OBJECTIONS L EARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT ON PERUSAL OF BANK ACCOUNT VIS-- VIS AUDITED ACCOUNTS, IT REVEALED THAT THERE ARE VOLUMINOUS TRANSACTIONS. TH E ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN GROSS RECEIPT OF RS.16,32,166/- AS PROFESSIONAL REC EIPTS; AS AGAINST THAT RS.79 LAKHS WERE FOUND TO BE CREDIT ENTRIES IN DIFFERENT BANK ACCOUNTS. THUS, HE HAS A PRIMA FACIE OPINION THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. AFTER GOING THROUGH THESE REASONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IT I S NOT SIMPLY THE INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM THE BANK ABOUT THE CASH D EPOSIT WHICH GOAD THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO FORM A BELIEF OF ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME - RATHER THIS IS BASED ON COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RECORD. OTHERW ISE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WOULD HAVE DROPPED THE RE-OPENING PROCEEDIN GS. THEREFORE, AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE DETAILS, WE DO NOT F IND ANY MERITS IN THIS ITA NO. 132/AHD/2017 SHRI MAHENDRA BHIKHALAL BHAVSAR VS. ITO AY : 2008-09 5 GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSE CHALLENGING REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS REJECTED. 7. IN GROUND NO.3 OF APPEAL, THE GRIEVANCE OF THE A SSESSEE IS THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.6 3,50,000/- WHICH WAS ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE AID OF SECT ION 69 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 8. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS E WAS MAINTAINING A JOINT SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WITH SYNDICATE BANK, KHOKHARA BRANCH. CASH DEPOSITS WERE MADE IN THIS ACCOUNT WHICH WERE WITHD RAWN OR USED FOR PAYMENTS. COMPLETE BANK STATEMENTS HAS BEEN PLACED ON PAGE NO. 235 AND ONWARDS. THE SUMMARY OF TRANSACTIONS TOTALING TO RS .63.50 LAKHS HAS BEEN PLACED ON PAGE NO.282-283 OF THE PAPER-BOOK. THE C ASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THAT IT IS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT AT THE END OF THE ASSESSEE. IN OTHER WORDS, HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE SOURCE OF DEPOSI TS IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT AND THEREFORE, IT IS TO BE TREATED AS UNDISCLOSED I NCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ON THE OTHER HAND, CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT BEING A LAWYER HE HAS RECEIVED THESE AMOUNTS IN FIDUCIARY CAPACITY. IT WAS JUST S IMILAR TO ESCROW ACCOUNT WHERE HE HAS DEPOSITED THESE AMOUNTS OF HIS CLIENT RELATED LAND TRANSACTIONS. THE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT TO SALE HA S BEEN PLACED BEFORE US AT PAGE NOS. 157 TO 165 OF THE PAPER-BOOK. A TRANSLAT ED COPY OF THIS AGREEMENT HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED ON PAGE NOS. 298 TO 301 OF THE PAPER-BOOK. SHRI KESHAVLAL K PATEL IS THE VENDOR OF THE LAND; WHERE AS SHRI GIRIRAJ SINGHJI ZALA IS THE PURCHASER OF THE LAND. SOME CIVIL SUIT S WERE PENDING BETWEEN THE VENDOR AND HIS CO-OWNER LATE SHRI SHIVAJI HEMAJ I. IT HAS BEEN PROVIDED IN THE AGREEMENT THAT VENDORS SHALL GET THE TITLE C LEARANCE CERTIFICATE FROM THE ASSESSEE. IN OTHER WORDS, WITH THE HELP OF THE ASS ESSEE, THE TITLE WAS REQUIRED TO BE CLEARED. CLAUSE 5 OF THE AGREEMENT PROVIDED AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 132/AHD/2017 SHRI MAHENDRA BHIKHALAL BHAVSAR VS. ITO AY : 2008-09 6 5. THE AMOUNT PAYABLE UNDER THIS AGREEMENT FOR SA LE SHALL BE PAID AS PER THE ESCROW ARRANGEMENT ABOVE MENTIONED AND SHALL BE PAID FOR GETTING TITLE CLEAR AND AS PER THE INSTRUCTION OF THE VENDOR. IN RESPECT TO THE PAYMENT AGREED HEREIN AS ON TODAY THE PARTY OF THE SECOND PART, I.E. THE PURCHASER HAS PAID IN THE ESCROW ACC OUNT WITH M/S MAHENDRA BHAVSAR & CO. RS. 500,000 (RUPEES FIVE LAKHS ONLY) IN CASH WHICH AMOUNT SHALL BE TREATED AS A PART OF THE PAYMENT PAYABLE U NDER THIS AGREEMENT FOR SALE FOR THE SAID LAND. ON THE STRENGTH OF THIS CLAUSE, IT WAS ALLEGED BY T HE ASSESSEE THAT AMOUNTS WERE USED TO PAY TO HIM, WHICH WERE ULTIMAT ELY REMITTED TO THE VENDOR. HE GAVE CONFIRMATION FROM ALL THESE PARTIE S. THIS VERSION OF THE ASSESSE WAS DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND LEARNED CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED FOLLOWING FINDINGS WHILE REJECTING THE CON TENTION OF THE ASSESSEE:- 7.3.5 REGARDING REMAINING CASH DEPOSITS OF RS.63 ,50,000/- THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT THIS AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED BY HIM IN F IDUCIARY CAPACITY ON BEHALF OF HIS CLIENT. THE APPELLANT STATED THAT BEI NG AN ADVOCATE, ONE OF SHRI GIRIRAJ SINGHJI ZALA WHO PURCHASED LAND WORTH RS.8, 51,00,001/- FROM SHRI KISHORELAL K PATEL, GIVEN CASE TO HIM AND HE DEPOSI TED THE SAME IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT AS ESCROW ACCOUNT. THE APPELLANT FILED COPY OF 'BANAKHAT' BETWEEN SHRI KESHAVLAL K. PATEL AND SHRI GIRIRAJ SINGH, IN WHICH IT IS MENTIONED IN PARA 4 THAT 10% PERCENT OF THE TRANSACTION VALUE WI LL BE KEPT WITH THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT THUS SUBMITTED THAT THE CA SH OF RS.63.50 LAKH DEPOSITED IN HIS ACCOUNT BELONG TO SHRI GIRIRAJ SIN GH. THEREFORE, ADDITIONS IN HIS HANDS SHOULD BE DELETED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MENTIONED IN THE REMAND REPORT THAT THE APPELLANT HAD ACCOUNT IN JOINT NAME WITH HIS OTHER TWO FAMILY MEMBERS. THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH JOINT NAME CA NNOT BE CONSIDERED AS ESCROW ACCOUNT. THE APPELLANT DEPOSITED OTHER MONEY I.E. HIS PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS ETC. IN THE SAME ACCOUNT. THE A.O. FURTHER MENTIONED THAT THE COPY OF 'BANAKHA PRODUCED BY THE APPELLANT IS NOT RELIA BLE EVIDENCE AS THE SIGNATURE OF SHRI GIRIRAJ SINGH ZALA ON ALL PAGES D O NOT TALLY WITH EACH OTHER. THE A.O. FURTHER MENTIONED THAT SHRI ZALA OBTAINED HIS PAN AAFPZ1988H IN 2004 AND IT CANNOT BE BELIEVED THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY BANK ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, THE A.O. REITERATED THAT ADDITIONS MADE BY HIM BE SUSTAINED. CONTENTIONS OF BOTH SIDES HAVE BEEN CAREFULLY EXAMI NED. IT CANNOT BE BELIEVED THAT A PERSON WHO IS BUYING LAND WORTH RS.8,51,00,001/- DOES NOT HAVE ANY BANK ACCOUNT. IT IS NOT CLEAR WHY THE 10% AMOUNT WAS TO BE GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT. THE CONDITION THAT 10% O F THE TRANSACTION VALUE BE KEPT WITH THE APPELLANT IS UNUSUAL AND SUCH CONDITI ONS ARE NOT FOUND IN ITA NO. 132/AHD/2017 SHRI MAHENDRA BHIKHALAL BHAVSAR VS. ITO AY : 2008-09 7 'BANAKHATS' MADE FOR LAND TRANSACTIONS. THE APPELLA NT HAD MANY BANK ACCOUNTS. IF FOR ANY REASON, ESCROW ACCOUNT IS OPEN ED, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SEPARATE ACCOUNT AND ONLY THE MONEY BELONG TO THE S PECIFIC PURPOSE, FOR WHICH ESCROW ACCOUNT IS OPENED, SHOULD HAVE BEEN DE POSITED IN THAT ACCOUNT. THE APPELLANT BEING A SENIOR ADVOCATE MUST BE KNOWI NG THIS. HOWEVER, HE KEEP THE CASH RECEIVED IN THE SAME ACCOUNT, IN WHIC H OTHER MONEY HAS BEEN DEPOSITED. THE ACCOUNT HAS BEEN FOUND IN JOINT NAME S WITH TWO OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE APPELLANT, WHICH ALSO AGAINST THE PR OCEDURE OF MAINTAINING ESCROW ACCOUNT. THESE FACTS CLEARLY PROVE THAT THE APPELLANT TRIED TO EXPLAIN THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THIS ACCOUNTS BY CREATING DOCU MENTS WHICH IS AN AFTERTHOUGHT. ONUS IS UPON THE APPELLANT TO EXPLAIN THE CREDITS IN HIS ACCOUNTS. ONUS INCREASED, WHEN THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IS IN CASH AND TO THE EXTENT OF RS.63.50 LACS. THE FACTS OF THIS CASE PRO VE THAT THE CASH OF RS.63.50 DEPOSITED IN THE APPELLANTS BANK ACCOUNT REMAIN UN EXPLAINED. THUS, IT IS INCOME OF THE APPELLANT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDER ATION. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS. 63,50,000/- MADE BY THE AO ARE CONF IRMED. 9. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ADDITION OF RS.63.50 LAKHS HAS BEEN C ONFIRMED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BY ASSIGNING PERIPHERAL REASONS THAT AN ESCROW ACCOUNT CANNOT BE OPENED IN THE JOINT NAME IF ASSESSEE WAS A PROFE SSIONAL WHILE HE HAS JOINED HIS FAMILY MEMBERS IN SAVINGS ACCOUNT. IT H AS ALSO BEEN OBSERVED THAT WHY THE ASSESSE HAS MADE OTHER DEPOSITS IN THI S ACCOUNT AS WELL AS IT WAS DOUBTED WHETHER A PERSON GOING TO PURCHASE THE LAND OF HAVING VALUE OF RS.8.5 CRORES WAS NOT MAINTAINING ACCOUNT. TO O UR MIND, THESE ARE NOT DIRECTLY TO THE TRANSACTIONS. THE ASSESSE HAS BEEN ALLEGING THAT IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY HE KEPT CERTAIN AMOUNT WHICH PERIODICALLY PAID TO VENDOR. THIS FACT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE PURCHA SER IN HIS CONFIRMATION. THE QUESTION WHETHER SHRI GIRIRAJ SINGHJI ZALA WAS HAVING BANK ACCOUNT WAS NEVER ENQUIRED; MORE SO, HIS HAVING BANK ACCOUN T IS AN IRRELEVANT QUESTION; BECAUSE ONCE THE PARTIES ARE SETTLING THE TERMS AND PROVIDING CERTAIN ARRANGEMENTS, THEN THOSE TERMS AND ACTION F OLLOWED UNDER THOSE TERMS CANNOT BE DOUBTED SIMPLY UNDER A REASONING TH AT THESE TRANSACTIONS COULD BE CONDUCTED IN A DIFFERENT MANNER NAMELY SHR I GIRIRAJ SINGHJI ZALA ITA NO. 132/AHD/2017 SHRI MAHENDRA BHIKHALAL BHAVSAR VS. ITO AY : 2008-09 8 COULD HAVE GIVEN THE AMOUNTS DIRECTLY FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT. IT IS TO BE APPRECIATED THAT SOMETIME THE PARTIES TO THE AGREEM ENT DO NOT BELIEVE EACH OTHER, CHEQUES CAN BE BOUNCED, LITIGATION COULD ARI SE; THEY ONLY FOLLOW A PARTICULAR METHOD THAT AMOUNT SHOULD GO TO THE MEDI ATOR TO WHOM BOTH HAVE FAITH. THUS, THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THE FACTS BY KEEPING IN MIND THAT THESE DEPOSITS HAVE B EEN TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY. SUMMARY OF THE RECEI PTS AND PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN PLACED ON PAGE NO. 282 OF THE PAPER-BOOK; THES E ARE REFLECTING IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS IN THE BANK AN D, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE UNDER SECTION 69 CANNOT BE MADE. WE, THEREFOR E, ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSE AND DELETE THIS ADDITION. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 29 TH JANUARY 2020 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( WASEEM AHMED ) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT AHMEDABAD, DATED 29/01/2020 *BT / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ! / THE APPELLANT 2. '! / THE RESPONDENT. 3. & ( / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) ( / THE CIT(A)- 5. & , & , /DR,ITAT, AHMEDABAD, 6. 1 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) & ITAT, AHMEDABAD