ITO, New Delhi V. Sh. Pratap Chandra Mahapatra, New Delhi

ITA 155/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 66073 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G S VIRK
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P.TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-155/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ITO, VS. PRATAP CHANDRA MAHAPATRA, WARD-48(1), ROOM NO-406, A-135-C, 1 ST FLOOR, MAYUR BHAWAN, FREEDOM FIGHTER COLONY, NEW DELHI-110001. NEB SARAI, DELHI. PAN-AHSPM9094K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. G.S.VIRK, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: SH. RAMESH AGARWAL, CA. APPEAL HEARD ON-19.12.2012 ORDER PRONOUNC ED ON-21.12.2012 ORDER PER B.C.MEENA, AM THIS APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE EMANATES FROM THE ORD ER OF THE CIT(A)-XXX, NEW DELHI DATED 20.10.2011. 2. THE ASSESSEE WAS WORKING WITH EATON POWER QUALIT Y PVT. LTD, S.NO-145, OFF MUMBAI PUNE ROAD, PIMPRI, PUNE AND SIFY TECHNOL OGIES LIMITED, TIDEL PARK, II FLOOR, 4 CANAL BANK ROAD, TARAMANI, CHENNA I. DURING THE YEAR, THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.24,27,590/- AGAINST WHICH TH E ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL AND THE CIT(A) GRANTED THE RELIEF BY HOLDING THAT ASSE SSEE HAS EXPLAINED EACH AND EVERY ENTRY OF THE BANK STATEMENT ALONG WITH DOCUME NTARY EVIDENCES AND ALSO THE I.T.A .NO.-155/DEL/2012 2 CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE IS A SALARIED PERSON, HE IS NOT MAINTAINING CASH BOOK, LEDGER ACCOUNT ON DAY-TO-DAY BASIS. CASH WIT HDRAWALS, DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IS TO BE BELIEVED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURC E OF DEPOSIT. THERE WAS NO DAY-TO-DAY BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, HENCE SECTION 68 IS N OT APPLICABLE. 3. IN THE APPEAL, THE ONLY ISSUE IS INVOLVED IN DEL ETING THE ADDITION OF RS.24,27,438/-. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON TH E ISSUE. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT PAPERS OF THE PAPER BOOK SUBMI TTED. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD, HE AND HIS WIFE DE CIDED TO PURCHASE A FLAT IN FREEDOM FIGHTER ENCLAVE, NEAR SAIDULAJAB, IGNOU ROA D, NEW DELHI. BEING AN UNAUTHORIZED COLONY, NO BANK WAS READY TO FINANCE T HE PROPERTY. IN THIS CONDITION, THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE ARRANGED MONEY FROM THEIR OWN SOURCES LIKE OWN SAVINGS AND LOAN FROM FATHER-IN-LAW AND BROTHER -IN-LAW. THESE LOANS WERE TAKEN BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE OR BANK DRAFT. THE R ELEVANT ENTRIES IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS ARE REFLECTED IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT STATEM ENT. AS THE SELLER OF THE FLATS WAS NOT READY TO ACCEPT THE CHEQUES OR DEMAND DRAFT , THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS TO MAKE PAYMENT IN CASH. FOR THIS PURPOSE, CASH WA S WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT. THIS IS CLEAR FROM PAGE 8 OF THE PAPER BO OK WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN OF CASH OF RS.18,27,000/- BETWEEN 21.01.2 008 TO 25.01.2008. THE DEAL OF PURCHASE OF FLAT WAS NOT MATERIALIZED, THEREFORE CASH WAS DEPOSITED BACK IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THERE WAS A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.16,75 ,000/- BETWEEN 29.01.2008 TO 31.01.2008 EVIDENT FROM PAGE 8 OF PAPER BOOK. T HE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT I.T.A .NO.-155/DEL/2012 3 WAS WITHDRAWN FROM BANK ACCOUNT. WE HOLD THAT THERE IS A FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CASH AMOUNT DEPO SITED WAS FROM THE CASH WITHDRAWALS MADE DURING 21.01.2008 TO 25.01.2008. 4. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE FIND THAT CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION. THEREFORE, WE SUSTAIN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND D ISMISS THE REVENUES APPEAL. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.12.2012. SD/- SD/- (R.P.TOLANI) (B.C.MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER DATED:21/12/2012 *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI