S.Kumar Mehtha, Manapparai V. ACIT, Trichy

ITA 1538/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 96636 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: K MEENAKSHISUNDHARAM ITP
• Section: 143(3); 69

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , C B ENCH, CHENNAI . . , ' # , $ & BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO . 1538/MDS/2015 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) MR. S.KUMAR MEHTHA, 34, CHINNIAH STREET, MANAPPARAI-621 306. VS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-II TIRUCHIRAPALLI. PAN: AAKPK9430E ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.K.MEENAKSHISUNDHARAM, ITP /RESPONDENT BY : MR. A.V.SREEKANTH, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 TH DECEMBER, 2015 / O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, TIRUCHIRAPALLI DATED 03.03.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE IS THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS NOT JU STIFIED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF UNEXPLAINED CAS H DEPOSITS. 2. THE ASSESSEE, AN INDIVIDUAL AND DEVELOPMENT OFFI CER OF LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION, FILED RETURN OF INCO ME ADMITTING INCOME OF ` 5,34,010/-. ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER 2 ITA NO.1538 /MDS/2015 SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 30.12.2010 ASSESSING THE INCOME AT ` 18,12,435/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT MADE ADDITION OF ` 12,78,325/- UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTME NT BEING CASH DEPOSITED INTO BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM THAT THESE AMOUNTS WERE RECEIVED FROM POLICYH OLDERS OF LIC FOR PAYMENT OF PREMIUM AND SUCH AMOUNTS WERE DEPOSITED INTO HIS BANK ACCOUNT AND LATER ON ASSESS EE ISSUED CHEQUES FOR PAYMENT OF INSURANCE PREMIUM ON BEHALF OF THE POLICYHOLDERS OF LIC. ON APPEAL, COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS) SUSTAINED THE ADDITION AS THE ASSESSE E COULD NOT FILE DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT IN VIEW OF THE SHORT TIME GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CONFIRMA TIONS FROM LIC POLICYHOLDERS COULD NOT BE OBTAINED AND SUBMITT ED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUB MITS THAT AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURN ISH CONFIRMATIONS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERI FICATION. COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE COLLECTED PREMIUM FROM LIC POLICYHOLDERS AND SUCH PREMIUM AMOUNT WAS DEPOS ITED 3 ITA NO.1538 /MDS/2015 IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT AND CHEQUES WERE ISSUED FOR PAY MENTS OF PREMIUM ON BEHALF OF THE LIC POLICYHOLDERS. COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT AMOUNTS DEPOSITED AND CHEQUES ISSUED ARE FOR I DENTICAL SUMS AND ALL THESE MONIES BELONG TO LIC POLICYHOLDE RS. THEREFORE, HE SUBMITS THAT ASSESSEE SHALL FURNISH T HE CONFIRMATIONS TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CAN ESTABLISH HIS CLAIM IF AN OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTS THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN TREATING THE AMOUNTS AS UNEXPL AINED INVESTMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. HEARD BOTH SIDES. PERUSED ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHOR ITIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF ` 12,78,325/- UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT BEING CASH DEPOSITS MADE BY T HE ASSESSEE INTO HIS ACCOUNT. FOR WANT OF DETAILS AND CONFIRMATIONS, THE ADDITION WAS SUSTAINED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE PLEADS BEFORE US THAT ASSESSEE SHALL FURNI SH CONFIRMATIONS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IF AN OP PORTUNITY IS GIVEN SINCE THE AMOUNTS DEPOSITED INTO BANK ACCOUNT REPRESENTS LIC PREMIUM PAYABLE BY THE POLICYHOLDERS . ON 4 ITA NO.1538 /MDS/2015 HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT A SSESSING OFFICER SHALL EXAMINE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND WE FEEL AN OPPORTUN ITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR FURNISHING CONF IRMATIONS FROM THE LIC POLICYHOLDERS, AS IT IS THE STAND OF T HE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID AMOUNTS DEPOSITED INTO BANK ACCOUNT R EPRESENT LIC PREMIUM PAYABLE BY THE POLICYHOLDERS AND IT DO ES NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, WE RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE SHALL FURNISH CONFIRMATI ON LETTERS TO ESTABLISH HIS CLAIM AND TO THE SATISFACTION OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH DECEMBER, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( . $ ) ( & () ) (D.KARUNAKARA RAO) (CHALLA NAGENDR A PRASAD ) + / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( + / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( /CHENNAI, - /DATED 30 TH DECEMBER, 2015 SOMU /0 10 /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. 2 () /CIT(A) 4. 2 /CIT 5. 0 6 /DR 6. /GF .