Syed Faizul Hasan, Shahjahanpur V. Income Tax Officer, Hardoi

ITA 156/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4815 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 13-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.156/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 INCOME TAX OFFICER, HARDOI 242001 VS SYED FAIZUL HASAN, C/O CA. SANJAY SAXENA, 12, PRATAP ENCLAVE, BISRAT (G.T.) ROAD, SHAHJAHANPUR- 242 001 PAN AAXPH 2770 H (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) SHRI SANJAY SAXENA, CA APPELLANT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM , DR RESPONDENT BY 19 / 1 1 /2015 DATE OF HEARING 13/01/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF LD. CIT (A), BAREILLY DATED 22.01.2014 FOR THE AY 2005-06. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AS PER REVISE D GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER: 1. THAT THE INITIATION OF RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS ONLY ON THE BASIS OF AIR INFORMATION ON THE WRONG/FALLACIOUS ASSUMPTI ON THAT THE BANK DEPOSITS CONSTITUTED UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND TH AT TOO WITHOUT ANY INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION BY THE A.O. IS BAD IN LAW AS THEY ARE BASED ON REASON TO SUSPECT. 2. THAT THE INITIATION OF RE- ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS ARE BAD IN LAW AS THE APPELLANT DOES NOT MAINTAIN NOR HAD MAINTAINED ANY ACCOUNT NO. 4319 WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, HARDOI AND THERE FORE THE 2 QUESTION OF DEPOSIT OF RS.10,54,400/- IN THE YEAR U NDER CONSIDERATION DO NOT ARISE AND THE REASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS MAY PLEASE BE CANCELLED. 3. THAT THE ID, CIT (A), BAREILLY ERRED ON FACTS AN D IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF THE RS. 10,54,400/- AS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT IN S7B ACCOUNT NO. 4319 WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, HARDOI W HICH NEVER BELONG TO THE APPELLANT EVEN AFTER OBTAINING THE RE MAND REPORT FROM THE A.O.. 4. THAT THE ID. A.O. NEVER INFORMED/CONFRONTED THE BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER AND NAME OF THE BANK NOR PROVIDED THE STATEM ENT OF BANK ACCOUNT NO.4319 WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA WHICH DO NOT BELONG TO THE APPELLANT. 5. ANY OTHER GROUND OF APPEAL THAT MAY BE TAKEN AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SAYS THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,54,100/- WAS DEPOSITED WITH THE UNION BANK OF INDIA ON 31.03.20115. HE FUR THER SUBMITTED THAT THE COPY OF PASSBOOK OF THE ASSESSEE, BANK ACCOUNT NO. 5114 WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, HARDOI IS AVAILABLE ON PAGES 11 AND 12 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND FROM THE SAME, IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THERE IS NO SUCH CASH DEPOSITED IN THI S BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO HAVING ONE CURRENT ACCOUNT NO. 23004 WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, HARDOI AND STATEMENT OF THIS BANK ACCOUNT IS AVAILABLE ON PAGES 14 AND 15 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND THERE IS A LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE BRANCH MANA GER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, HARDOI REGARDING VERIFICATION OF TRANSFER TRANSACTI ON IN THIS CURRENT ACCOUNT DURING FY 2004-05. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ON PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SAYS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSI TED THIS AMOUNT OF RS.10,54,400/- IN CASH ON 31.03.2005 IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO. 4319 SAID TO BE MAINTAINED WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA, HARDOI BUT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINING THIS ACCOUNT AND COPY OF THIS BANK ACCOUNT STATEMEN T OR PASS BOOK HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE ASSESSEE. BEFORE US ALSO, BANK STATEMENT 3 OR COPY OF BANK PASS BOOK OF SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO . 4319 WITH UNION BANK OF INDIA FOR THE FY 2004-05 HAS NOT BEEN PRODUCED. UND ER THESE FACTS, WE FEEL IT PROPER THAT THE MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH DECISION PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF T HE ASSESSEE AVAILABLE AT PAGE NO 21 OF THE PAPER BOOK IN WHICH IT IS STATED BY THE ASSE SSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT MAINTAINING ANY SUCH BANK ACCOUNT NO. 4319 WITH UNI ON BANK OF INDIA AT ANY POINT OF TIME. HENCE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A ) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH DECISION WI TH THE DIRECTION THAT HE SHOULD SUPPLY A COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF SAVING BANK ACCO UNT NO. 4319 ALLEGED TO BE BELONGING TO THE ASSESSEE SAID TO BE MAINTAINED WIT H UNION BANK OF INDIA, HARDOI AND THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD MAKE HIS SUBMIS SION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD PASS NECESSARY ORDER AS PER LAW AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO TH E ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R DATED: 13/01/2016 AKS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR