The Income Tax Officer, Jalandhar V. Sh. Ranjit Singh, Jalandhar

ITA 139/ASR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0802 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 02-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S KANWAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. A.D.JAIN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [ I.T.A NO.139 (ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2011-12 ITO, WARD-IV(1) JALANDHAR. VS. SH. RANJIT SINGH S/O SH. BALWANT SINGH 2066/7, MAIN ROAD, ADAMPUR, JALANDHAR. PAN:ABQPS4882D (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. S. S. KANWAL (DR) RESPONDENT BY: NONE. DATE OF HEARING: 04.05. 2016 DATE OF PRONO UNCEMENT: 05.05.2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 23.12.2015 FOR ASST. YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF A PPEAL. (I) THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FA CTS OF THE CASE IN ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WITHOUT APPRECIA TING THE FACTS THAT NONE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES MENTIONED IN RULE 46A(1) OF TH E INCOME TAX RULES WAS PREVALENT IN THE CASE AND THE FACT THAT THE AMO UNT OF CASH DEPOSITS WERE NOT EXPLAINED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, DESPITE GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.139 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 2011-1 2 2 (II) THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.46,58,000/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCO UNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS. (III) IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 3. NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE AND NEITH ER ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, WITH THE HELP OF LEARNED DR, WE FOUND THAT THE APPE AL OF THE REVENUE CAN BE DISPOSED OFF EVEN WITH WITHOUT PRESENCE OF ASSES SEE OR HIS COUNSEL. THEREFORE, THE LEARNED DR WAS DIRECTED TO ARGUE THE CASE. 4. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT ASS ESSEE HAD NOT APPEARED BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER DESPITE A NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN TO HIM AND THEREFORE, ASSESSING OFFICER WAS F ORCED TO COMPLETE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT AND IN SUPPORT OF HIS ARGUMENT THE LEARNED DR INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 2 OF ASSES SMENT ORDER WHERE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NOTED THE VARIOUS DATES FIXED FOR HEARING AND ON WHICH NO ONE HAD APPEARED EXCEPT ON TWO OCCASIONS. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT IN SPITE OF SO MUCH OPPORTUNITIES TH E ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY EVIDENCE FOR DEPOSITS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT AND B EFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) HE FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHICH LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE ADMITTED AS NONE OF CONDITIONS MENTIONED FOR ACCEPT ANCE OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WERE IN EXISTENCE. THEREFORE, IT WAS PRAYE D THAT THE CASE MAY BE ITA NO.139 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 2011-1 2 3 RESTORED TO THE OFFICE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WHO SHO ULD EXAMINE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN VIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR AND HAVE GONE THROU GH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT IT IS A FACT THAT AS SESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER DESPITE A NUMBER OF OPPORT UNITIES WERE AFFORDED TO HIM AND THEREFORE, ASSESSING OFFICER WAS COMPELL ED TO COMPLETE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT. BEFORE THE LEARNED C IT(A) THE ASSESSEE THROUGH HIS WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS SUBMITTED THAT HE HAD SOLD A PROPERTY FOR RS.22,50,000/- FOR WHICH PAYMENT WAS RECEIVED I N CASH AND OUT OF THE SALE PROCEEDS THE AMOUNT WERE DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNTS. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT SAID SALE OR PROPERTY WAS ALSO REFLECTED IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HA D DECLARED SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.2,50,000/-, THEREFORE, THE INFORMATION FOR AVAILABILITY OF CASH WAS ALREADY AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL EVID ENCE WHICH INCLUDED CASH FLOW STATEMENT AND COPY OF BANK ACCOUNTS AND W HICH LEARNED CIT(A) SENT TO ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS. THE ASS ESSING OFFICER DID NOT COMMENT ON THE MERITS OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, H OWEVER, HE OBJECTED TO THE ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. IN THIS RE SPECT, WE FIND THAT THE PRIMARY SOURCE FOR DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT WAS THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM SALE OF PROPERTY WHICH WAS DECLARED BY ASSESSE E IN HIS INCOME TAX RETURN AND MOREOVER, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF CASH FLOW STATEMENT DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE CORE ISSUE AND MO REOVER, LEARNED ITA NO.139 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 2011-1 2 4 ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT POINTED OUT DISCREPANCY I N CASH FLOW STATEMENT. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS MADE A FINDING OF FACT THAT IF THE SALE PROCEEDS OF PROPERTY WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE IN CASH AND OTHER CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM SAME BANK ACCOUNTS ON DIFFERE NT DATES ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THEN ALL THE CASH DEPOSITS IN BOTH BAN KS STANDS EXPLAINED. THEREFORE, ON MERITS THE ASSESSEE WAS ABLE TO EXPLA IN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNTS AND THEREFORE, THE LEARNE D CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION. 6. AS REGARDS THE OBJECTION OF REVENUE THAT LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WE FIND THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS NOTHING BUT A CASH FLOW STATEMENT PREP ARED ON THE BASIS OF BANK STATEMENTS AND ON THE BASIS OF CASH RECEIVED F ROM SALE OF PROPERTY WHICH ALREADY EXISTED ON RECORDS AND WHICH RELATED TO THE CORE ISSUE OF SOURCE OF DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND WHICH WA S NECESSARY FOR IMPARTING JUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE A BOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A), THEREFORE, THE APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IS D ISMISSED. [ 7. IN NUTSHELL, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH MAY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (T. S. KAPO OR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:05.05.2016. /PK/ PS. ITA NO.139 (ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 2011-1 2 5 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER