Smt Mona Agarwal, Kolkata V. ACIT,C-XII,Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1349/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1630 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 21-09-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R P NAG LD
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNIL SURANA ACA LD
• Keywords: Search and seizure; Peak credit

Judgement Text

, A , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH- A CALCUTTA () BEFORE . . , SHRI P . K. BANSAL., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER !'# /AND $%$& 1(, SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER #) / ITA NOS. 1349 TO 1355/KOL/2012 *% '+,/ ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-04 TO 2009-10 SMT. MONA AGARWAL, PAN: ACVPA3955D ACIT, CIR-XII, KOLKATA ((. / APPELLANT ) - ' - - VERSUS -. (0(./ RESPONDENT ) (. *! /FOR THE APPELLANT / SHRI SUNIL SURANA, ACA, LD. AR 0(. *! / FOR THE RESPONDENT: / SHRI R.P NAG, LD. SR.DR 1'2 3 4 /DATE OF HEARING : 04-02-2013 5+ 3 4 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 4-02-2013 / ORDER 67 / PER BENCH THESE ARE SEVEN APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST ORDERS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A), CENTRAL-II, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NOS. 133/CC-XII/CIT(A)C-II/10-11, 134/CC- XII/CIT(A)C-II/10-11/KOL, 135/CC-XII/CIT(A)C-II/10- 11/KOL, 136/CC-XII/CIT(A)C-II/10-11/KOL, 137/CC-XII/CIT(A)C-II/10-11/KOL, 138/CC-XII/CIT(A)C -II/10-11, 139/CC-XII/CIT(A)C-II/10- 11/KOL DATED 28-01-2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 TO 2009-10 RESPECTIVELY. 2. SHRI SUMIL SURANA, ACA. LEARNED AR REPRESENTE D ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI R.P. NAG, LEARNED SR. DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF TH E REVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSES SEE THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION CONDUCTED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 7-11-2008. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN THE COURSE OF SEAR CH ONE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE ORIENTA L BANK OF COMMERCE, GARIAHAT BRANCH WAS FOUND. IT WAS FAIRLY AGREED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT HAD NOT BEEN DISCLOSED IN THE RETURNS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENTS HAD ADDED THE TOTAL CREDITS BEING THE CHEQUE AN D CASH DEPOSITS DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL THE ONLY CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT WHEN COMPUTING THE ITA NOS. 1349 TO 1355/K/12-PB-GM-A 2 UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE SAID BANK ACC OUNT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GRANTED THE BENEFIT O F DEDUCTION OF THE OPENING BALANCE IN RESPECT OF THE BANK ACCOUNT FOR EACH OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS AND THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GRANTED THE BENEFI T OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80L OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF TH E INTEREST FOR EACH OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS . IT WAS ALSO THE SUBMISSION THAT AUTO SWEEP INVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE FROM THE SAID ACCOUNT, W HICH WERE ALSO CREDITED TO THE SAME BANK ACCOUNT AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE SAME SHOULD NOT BE AD DED TWICE AS BOTH THE AUTO SWEEP AND THE CREDIT BACK HAD BEEN DONE THROUGH THE SAME ACCOUNT. THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAD PLACED BEFORE US THE COPY OF THE COMPUTATION AFTER CLAIMING SAID D EDUCTIONS. 4. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED SR.DR DID NOT MAKE ANY SP ECIFIC SUBMISSION IN RESPECT OF THE SAID CLAIMS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION BY THE LEARNED SR.DR THAT IN RESPECT OF THE CLAIM OF PEAK CREDITS THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN GIVEN OPPORTUNITY BY THE AO TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT MADE ANY SUBMISSION. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD CATEGORICALL Y GIVEN A FINDING THAT AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN PAID FROM THE SAID ACCOUNT TOWARDS SCHOOL FEES AS ALSO TOWARDS OTHER PERSONS AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE SAME COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR COMPUTING OF PEAK CRED ITS. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PERU SAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE AO HAS BROUGHT TO TAX THE TOTAL CREDITS AS APPEARIN G IN THE BANK ACCOUNT YEAR AFTER YEAR. NO BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80L OR REDUCTION TOWARDS OPENING BAL ANCE HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. A PERUSAL OF THE BANK ACCOUNT ALSO SHOWS THAT THE CLAIM OF A SSESSEE THAT AUTO SWEEP HAD BEEN DONE AND THE SAME HAS BEEN CREDITED BACK, SUBSEQUENTLY, IT IS ALSO CORRECT. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE V IEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF DED UCTION TOWARDS THE OPENING BALANCE FOR EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR AS ALSO THE DEDUCTION U/S. 80L OF THE ACT. FURTHER, AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE AUTO SWEEP HAS BEEN DONE FROM THE SAID ACCOUNT AND THE SAME HAS ALSO BEEN CREDITED BACK TO THE SAID ACCOUNT DURING SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS IN RESPE CT OF VARIOUS INVESTMENTS. THE ADDITION MUST BE RESTRICTED BY CONSIDERING ONLY ONE OF THE TRANSAC TION AND NOT BOTH. FURTHER, THE AO SHALL ALSO GRAN T THE ASSESSEE THE BENEFIT OF TELESCOPING IN RESPEC T OF THE INCOME ADDED IN EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME AS THE SAME W OULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE IN MAKING THE DEPOSITS FOR THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS. IN RESPECT OF PEAK CREDIT, NO COMPUTATION OF THE SAM E HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE US, THEREFORE, WE REFRAIN FR OM GOING INTO THE SAID ISSUE. ITA NOS. 1349 TO 1355/K/12-PB-GM-A 3 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 8 1 6 1 9 8: THIS ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT AS DICTATED ON DT 4.-02-2013 SD/- SD/- *PP/SPS 3 **; <;+= / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. . (. / THE APPELLANT : SMT MONA AGARWAL PAN: ACVPA3955D 5 TILAK ROAD, KOL- 29. 2 0(. / THE RESPONDENT- ACIT,CIRCLE-XII, 18 RABINDRA SA RANI, PODDAR COURT, KOL-1. 3 4. . * / THE CIT, * ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5 . '>*9 * / DR, KOLKATA BENCH 6 . GUARD FILE . 0; */ TRUE COPY, 1/ BY ORDER, 8 #$ /ASSTT REGISTRAR ( . . , ) (P. K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ( $%$& 1 ( , ) (GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ( (( (4 4 4 4) )) ) DATE 4 -02-2013