Rajiv Goel, New Delhi V. ACIT, Circle- 61(1), New Delhi

ITA 1344/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7069 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 1344/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Rajiv Goel, A-1/703, Milan Vihar Apartment, Patparganj, New Delhi-110092 Vs ACIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ADFPG9012Q Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Hemant Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 03.12.2021 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-28, New Delhi dated 15.12.2017. 2. The only issue to be adjudicated in this case is that whether the assessee is liable to taxation on the amount which already stands taxed in the hands of the company who is the real owner of the amount as seized by the revenue. 3. Brief facts relevant to the adjudication is that the assessee was intercepted by Police on 05.01.2015 and on 08.01.2015 the amount of Rs. 1 Crore was seized u/s 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The statement of the assessee was recorded by the DDIT(Inv.) wherein it was stated that the cash was taken by him from Sh. Vibhore Jain from his business premises at Village-Alipur Khalsa, Khodpura Road, Karnal and this cash was to be delivered to Sh. Raj Manocha at J-60, ITA No. 1344/Del/2018 Rajiv Goel 2 Saket, New Delhi. To verify the veracity of the statement of the assessee, the DDIT(Inv.) recorded the statement of Sh. Vibhore Jain wherein Sh. Vibhore Jain claimed that the cash of Rs.1 Crore belongs to M/s Javi Homes Pvt. Ltd., Karnal wherein he is a Director. Since, Sh. Vibhore Jain accepted this amount as belonging to M/s Javi Homes Pvt. Ltd. and since the cash amount could not be substantiated with regard to the source in the books of accounts of M/s Javi Homes Pvt. Ltd., the same has been offered as additional income in the hands of M/s Javi Homes Pvt. Ltd. for the A.Y. 2015-16 over and above the normal business income. 4. The offering of the additional income in the hands of M/s Javi Homes Pvt. Ltd. could not be disputed as the amount has been disclosed in the gross receipts of the M/s Javi Homes Pvt. Ltd. The revenue authorities repeated the addition in the hands of the assessee holding that the affairs of the company have been managed in such a way that the tax incidence on account of the disclosure of Rs.1 Crore may not make much difference so far as the tax payable by it. 5. Having heard the arguments of both the parties and perusal of material on record, we find that the statements of both the parties namely the assessee and Sh. Vibhore Jain have been recorded by the DDIT(Inv.) and it is an accepted fact that Sh. Vibhore Jain, as the Director of M/s Javi Homes Pvt. Ltd. has accepted the ownership of the cash in the hands of M/s Javi Homes Pvt. Ltd. and offered the same to tax. The said return has been duly assessed and accepted by the revenue. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that the same amount is taxable doubly in the hands of the assessee. Hence, the addition made is liable to be deleted. ITA No. 1344/Del/2018 Rajiv Goel 3 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 03/12/2021. Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 03/12/2021 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR