ITO, New Delhi V. Shri Chetan Prakash Aggarwal, Delhi

ITA 1467/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0336 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 05-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRENDRA KUMAR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI, BENCH B NEW DELHI, BENCH B NEW DELHI, BENCH B NEW DELHI, BENCH B BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K. D. RANJAN, ACCOUTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1467/DEL/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06) I.T.O., WARD 21(1), VS. SHRI CHETAN PRAKASH AGGARW AL, NEW DELHI WZ-430, MADIPUR VILLAGE, DELHI & G-8/84, SECTOR 15, ROHINI DELHI-85. (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENTS) PAN / GIR NO. ADGPA5911M APPELLANT BY: SHRI AMRENDRA KUMAR, SR, D.R. RESPONDENT BY: NONE ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER K. D. RANJAN, AM: PER K. D. RANJAN, AM: PER K. D. RANJAN, AM: PER K. D. RANJAN, AM: 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2005-06 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) XXII, NEW DEL HI. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HAVING REGARD TO THE ISSUE INVOLVED, THE APPEAL IS DECIDED AFTER HEA RING LD. SR. DR. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 1) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DEL ETING HT ADDITION OF ` 17,32,700/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOU NT OF UNEXPLAINED SOURCES. 2) THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELE TING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD EXP LAINED THE CREDITS AS OF BENEFICIARIES AND THIS EXPLANATIO N WAS RIGHTLY NOT ACCEPTED BY THE A.O. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION RELATES TO DELE TION OF ADDITION OF ` 17,32,700/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF UNE XPLAINED SOURCES. THE FACTS OF THE CASE STATED IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE CASE WAS PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY ON THE BASIS OF AIR INFORMAT ION RECEIVED BY I.T.A. NO. 1467/DEL/2010 2/2 THE A.O. AS PER THE INFORMATION, THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED ` 17,32,700/- IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT WITH BANK OF RAJAST HAN, NEW DELHI. THE A.O. REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE EVIDE NCE FOR SOURCE OF DEPOSITS. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS OF A BENEFICIARY AS HE WAS AN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OPERATOR. ON BEING ASKED ABOU T THE DETAILS OF BENEFICIARIES I.E. THE NAMES & ADDRESSES OF THE BENEFICIARIES, THE NAMES OF BENEFICIARIES WERE NOT DISCLOSED. SINCE T HE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT WAS NOT EXPLAINED, THE A.O. MADE ADDITION U /S 68 OF THE ACT AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. 3. ON APPEAL, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 WERE NOT APPLICABLE, AS TH E ASSESSEE HAD NOT MAINTAINED ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THEREFORE, P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 WERE NOT APPLICABLE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD 1.04.2004 TO 31.03.2005 IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION THAT NO SUCH ENTRY OF CASH DEPOSIT W AS APPEARING IN IT. 4. LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MAD E BY THE ASSESSEE, REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT T HE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 WERE NOT APPLICABLE. HOWEVER HE OBSERVE D THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT NO.0950301110198 WITH THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.2004 TO 31.03.2005 DID NOT REVEAL ANY DEPOSITS OF ` 17,32,700/- AND THEREFORE, THERE WAS A MISTAKE IN A IR INFORMATION. THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, INFERRED THAT THE A.O. WITHOUT GOING INTO DETAILS OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS, MADE THE ADDITION WHI CH COULD BE SUSTAINED. HE ACCORDINGLY, DELETED THE ADDITION. 5. WE HAVE HEARD LD. SR. DR AND PERUSED THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) CAREFULLY. BEFO RE A.O., IT WAS I.T.A. NO. 1467/DEL/2010 3/3 ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DEPOSITS MADE REL ATED TO THE BENEFICIARY TO WHOM HE HAD PROVIDED ACCOMMODATION E NTRY. HOWEVER BEFORE LD. CIT(A) HE HAS TAKEN A PLEA THAT NO SUCH DEPOSIT WAS MADE IN THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT. LD. CIT(A) WITH OUT GOING INTO FURTHER DETAILS, HAS DELETED THE ADDITION BY INFERR ING THAT ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE WITHOUT GOING INTO DETAILS OF THE BA NK ACCOUNTS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE FACTS ARE NOT CLEAR AND THER EFORE, WE FEEL IT PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO HE FILE OF THE A. O. WITH THE DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THE INFORMATION RECEIVED AS PE R AIR AND SCRUTINIZE THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN ORDE R TO FIND OUT THE DEPOSITS. THE A.O. WILL PROVIDE THE ASSESSEE A REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND WILL DECIDE THE ISSU E ON MERITS BY PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE AI R INFORMATION, THE DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND THE EXPLANATION TO BE OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THEE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07 TH MARCH 2011. SD./- SD./- (R. P. TOLANI) (K. D. RANJAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:07 TH MAR., 2011 SP. COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT TRUE COPY: BY ORDER 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI