Malini Ramesh, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 1397/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6181 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SAGADEVAN IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: T T DURAIRAJ KANDIAR
• Keywords: Gift

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI . , [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT M EMBER ] ./I.T.A. NO. 1397/MDS/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-2011. MRS. MALINI RAMESH, SREE NO.1171, TVS COLONY, ANNA NAGAR WEST EXTN, CHENNAI 600 101. [PAN AVJPM 1925G] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 7(4) CHENNAI. ( !' / APPELLANT) ( # $!' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. T.T. DURAIRAJ KANDIAR, FCA /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. B. SAGADEVAN, IRS, JCIT. /DATE OF HEARING : 14-09-2017 !' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19-09-2017 % / O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED ON SUSTENANCE OF A DISALLOWANCE OF D6,05,500/- BY THE LD. COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-7, CHENNAI THROUGH HIS ORDER DATED 2 7.04.2017. 2. FACTS APROPOS ARE THAT ASSESSEE A SALARIED EMPLOYE E AND ALSO HAVING INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAINS AND OTHER SOU RCES HAD ITA NO.1397/MDS/2017. :- 2 -: MAINTAINED BANK ACCOUNTS WITH M/S. AXIS BANK. LD. A SSESSING OFFICER DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOUND THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN CASH DEPOSITS IN SUCH BANK ACCOUNTS. THESE CASH DEPOSI TS AS LISTED BY LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WERE AS UNDER:- SL.NO NAME OF THE BANK NAME OF THE A/C. HOLDER DATE AMOUNT D 1 AXIS BANK MALINI RAMESH 19.12.2009 1,00,000 2 AXIS BANK MALINI RAMESH 22.12.2009 5,50,000 3 AXIS BANK MALINI RAMESH 06.03.2010 1,00,000 4 AXIS BANK MALINI RAMESH & RAMESH SRIDHAR 17.12.2009 7,65,000 TOTAL CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNTS 15,15,000 EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT SHE HAD RECEI VED CASH GIFT OF D9,10,000/- FROM HER HUSBAND WHO WAS WORKING ABROA D. AS PER THE ASSESSEE, HER HUSBAND HAD AN NRE ACCOUNT WITH STATE BANK OF INDIA AND WITHDRAWALS FROM SUCH NRE ACCOUNT WERE GIVEN TO HER AS GIFTS. CONFIRMATIONS WERE ALSO FILED. HOWEVER, AS PER LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AGAINST TOTAL BANK DEPOSITS OF D15,15,000/-, ASSE SSEE COULD OFFER EXPLANATION ONLY FOR D9,10,000/-. HE MADE AN ADDIT ION FOR THE BALANCE SUM OF D6,05,000/-. ITA NO.1397/MDS/2017. :- 3 -: 3. IN HER APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT, OUT O F THE CREDITS WHICH WERE CONSIDERED FOR ADDITION, THERE WAS DEPO SIT OF D7,65,000/- ON 17.12.2009 WHICH WAS IN A BANK ACCOUNT WHICH WA S HELD IN HER HUSBANDS NAME. AS PER THE ASSESSEE THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT PROVED THE SOURCE FOR THE DEPOSITS. HOWEVER, LD. COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE CASH FLOW STA TEMENT DID NOT SHOW THE SOURCE OF THE DEPOSITS. HE CONFIRMED AN A DDITION OF D6,05,000/-. 4. NOW BEFORE ME, LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE STRONG LY ASSAILING THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) SUBMITTED THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT IN WHICH THE SUM OF D7,65,000/- WAS DEPOSITED ON 17.12.2009 WAS IN THE NAME OF S HRI. RAMESH SRIDHAR, HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDING TO LD . AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ASSESSEE WAS ONLY A JOINT HOLDER. H E CONTENDED THAT CREDITS IN SUCH JOINT ACCOUNT OF WHICH PRIMARY NAME WAS THAT OF ASSESSEES HUSBAND COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR ADDI TION IN ASSESSEES HAND. ITA NO.1397/MDS/2017. :- 4 -: 5. PER CONTRA, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMI TTED THAT JUST BECAUSE THE ACCOUNT WAS HELD IN JOINT NAME AS SESSEE COULD NOT SAY THAT ADDITION SHOULD ONLY BE MADE IN HER HUSBA NDS NAME. 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE TOTAL CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS AGGREGATED TO D15,15,000/-. ASSESSEES EXPLANATION FOR THE SUM OF D9,10,000/- OUT OF THE ABOVE, WAS ACCEPTED BY THE L D. ASSESSING OFFICER. NOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT D7, 65,000/- DEPOSITED ON 17.12.2009 WAS IN AN ACCOUNT OF HER HUSBAND SHR I. RAMESH SRIDHAR WHO WAS AN NRE. ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ON REC ORD COPY OF THIS ACCOUNT WITH M/S. AXIS BANK. CAPTION OF THE SAID ACCOUNT READS AS UNDER:- RAMESH SREEDHAR JOINT HOLDER :- MALINI RAMESH NO. 1171, TVS COLONY, 57 TH STREET, ANNA NAGAR WEST EXT CHENNAI CUSTOMER NO.345015692 TAMIL NADU SCHEME:- SAVINGS EASY ACCESS 600101. CURRENCY : INR IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE THAT THE PRIMARY ACCOUNT HOLDER WAS SHRI. RAMESH SRIDHAR AND NOT SMT. MALINI RAMESH THE ASSES SEE. IN MY OPINION, ASSESSEE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN SADDLED WITH A TAX LIABILITY ON CREDITS MADE BY HER HUSBAND IN AN ACCOUNT OF WHICH HE WAS THE ITA NO.1397/MDS/2017. :- 5 -: PRIMARY HOLDER. THAT APART, I ALSO FIND THAT SHRI. RAMESH SRIDHAR WAS AN ASSESSEE HAVING PAN ALZPR0620D AND HAD ALSO FI LED A RETURN FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. I THEREFORE FIND NO R EASON TO SUSTAIN THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. SUC H ADDITION STANDS DELETED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF SEP TEMBER, 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED:19TH SEPTEMBER, 2017 KV &' ()*) / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. +,- / CIT(A) 5. )./ 0 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. + / CIT 6. /12 / GF