Smt. Rinku Hitesh Shah, Surat V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Surat

ITA 1455/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1439 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 09-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAMLESH MAKWAN
• Assessee Lawyers: KETAN C TRIVEDI
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA.NO.1455/AHD/2013 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2009-2010 SMT.RINKU HITESH SHAH 9/B, NILGAGAN APARTMENT DIWALI BAUG ATHWALINES SURAT 395 001. PAN : AGLPS 7654 K VS ITO, WARD - 3(1) SURAT. ! / (APPELLANT) '# ! / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI KETAN C. TRIVEDI, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI KAMLESH MAKWAN, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 09/06/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10/06/2016 $%/ O R D E R THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-IV, SURAT DATED 28.2.2013 PASSED FOR THE ASSTT.YEAR 2009-10. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRE D IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.33,30,940/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED BANK ACCOUNT. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRE D IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.1,71,973/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CREDITORS. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.6,340/- ON ACCOUNT OF 20% DISALLOWANCE OF TOT AL EXPENSES. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRE D IN MAKING ADDITION ITA NO.1455/AHD/2013 2 OF RS.10,625/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUC TION CLAIMED U/S VI- A. 5. APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR ALTER ANY GROUN D(S) EITHER BEFORE OR IN THE COURSE OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES, I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. IT EMERGES OUT FROM THE RECORD T HAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS AN EX PARTE PASSED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. T HE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBMIT RELEVANT DETAILS BEFORE THE AO, BE CAUSE HER HUSBAND WAS FACING FINANCIAL PROBLEM, AND CRIMINAL CASE REGISTE RED AGAINST HIM. EVEN BEFORE THE CIT(A), SHE COULD NOT PROSECUTE HER APPE AL PROPERLY. THE MAJOR ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS OF RS.33,30,940/-. THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE GROUND THAT ANNUAL INFORMATION REPORT WING T RANSMITTED A REPORT TO THE AO ABOUT THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH BANK OF BARODA. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCLOSE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS MADE IN THIS ACCOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS.33,30,940/-. THE APPEAL TO TH E LD.CIT(A) DID NOT BRING ANY RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. BEFORE ME, THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ON RECORD COP Y OF BANK STATEMENT AS WELL AS OTHER DETAILS. ACCORDING TO THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, IT IS A JOINT BANK ACCOUNT WITH HER HUSBAND. THE FIRST NAME IS O F ASSESSEE. THE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED PRIMARILY BY HER HUSBAND. HE M ADE REFERENCE TO FIRST MAJOR ENTRY DATED 17.4.2008. ACCORDING TO THIS ENT RY, A SUM OF RS.4,66,151/- WAS DEPOSITED IN THIS ACCOUNT THROUGH CLEARING OF C HEQUE NO.8425. PHOTO COPY OF THE CHEQUE NO.8425 ISSUED FROM ICICI BANK H AS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. IT IS AVAILABLE ON PAGE NO.10 OF THE PAPER BOOK. ON THE STRENGTH OF THIS DOCUMENT, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONT ENDED THAT SHRI HITESH D. SHAH, HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE TOOK HOME EQUITY LOAN FROM ICICI BANK, AND FROM THERE, THE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED IN THIS ACCOUNT. SIMILARLY, PHOTO ITA NO.1455/AHD/2013 3 COPY OF NEXT CHEQUE OF RS.4.00 LAKHS HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF ALL THESE MATERIALS, I AM VIEW THA T IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY DESERVES TO BE GIVEN TO THE AS SESSEE TO EXPLAIN HER CASE. AFTER HEARING THE LD.DR, I ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE, SET ASIDE BOTH THE ORDERS AND RESTORE ALL THESE ISSUES TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LI BERTY TO SUBMIT ANY DETAILS OR EXPLANATION IN SUPPORT OF HER CASE. 4. THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY ME WILL NOT IMPAIR OR I NJURE THE CASE OF THE AO AND WILL NOT CAUSE ANY PREJUDICE TO THE DEFENCE/ EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 10 TH JUNE, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER