Kulanand Pandey, Jamshedpur V. ITO,Ward-2(4), Jamshedpur

ITA 163/RAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9586 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Transfer Pricing) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K MONDAL
• Keywords: Salary income
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO . 163 /RAN/ 201 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 163 /RAN/201 5 A .Y. : 20 07 - 2008 KULANAND PANDEY, C/O - CA NAWAL KISHORE MAHATO, FLAT NO.401, 4 TH FLOOR, K .C.APARTMENT, 137 AMBAGAN ROAD, SAKCHI, JAMSHEDPUR - 831001 V S ITO WARD - 2(4), BAGMATI ROAD, BISTUPMUR, JAMSHEDPUR - 831001 P AN NO. : A FQPP 1788 P (APPELLANT ) . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY :SHRI P.K.MONDAL, JCIT DATE OF HEAR ING : 2 4 . 05 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.05 .201 8 O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT ( A ) , JAMSHEDPUR , DATED 27.08.2015 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 08 . 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 7 DAYS IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. LD. AR HAS FILED AN APPLICATION DATED 26.02.2016 FOR CONDOANTION OF DELAY. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY OF 7 DAYS IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL AN D APPEAL IS HEARD FINALLY. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE , 2 ITA NO . 163 /RAN/ 201 5 THEREFORE, THE BENCH PROCEEDED TO DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 4 . THE SOLE DISPUTED ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE U/S.68 OF THE ACT. 5 . B RIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THA T THE ASSESSEE DERIVES INCOME FROM SALARY/PENSION FROM LIC AND SHARE INCOME FROM DEMAT ACCOUNT AND FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 26.07.2007 WITH TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,59,350/ - . THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS PROCESSED U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ON CASS AND NOTICES U/S.1 43(2) & 142(1) OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN COMPLIANCE, THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED FROM TIME TO TIME. THEREAFTER THE AO COMPLETED THE ASS ESSMENT AND MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.20,25,000/ - U/S.68 OF THE ACT AND ASSESSED TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 21 ,84,360/ - AND PASSED ORDER U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT. 6 . AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL WITH THE CIT(A). IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE ARGUED THE GROUNDS AND REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS AND LD.CIT(A) HA VING CONSIDERED THE FINDINGS AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE DEALT ON THE DISPUTED ISSUE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 7 . AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 8 . NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, WHEREAS LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT COMPLIED THE REQUISITE 3 ITA NO . 163 /RAN/ 201 5 DETAILS BEFORE THE AO, NOR IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. PRIMA FACIE, ON PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WE FOUND THAT THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION U/S.68 OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSIT S MADE IN THE ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE W AS REQUIRED TO MAKE SUBMISSION IN RESPECT OF THE SOURCE BUT IT WAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED EARLIER THAT DEPOSIT S ARE MADE BY THE ASSESSEES SON - IN - LAW AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL THAT THE SON - IN - LAW HAS TAKEN TEMPORARY LOAN FROM HIS FATHER - IN - LAW AND THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN RETURNED TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE HAD TO PURCHASE A FLAT DURING THE YEAR, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS THE AO MADE THE ADDITION. HOWEVER, IN THE AOS ORDER, THESE FACTS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RELOOKED UPON THE DISPUTED ISSUE. HENCE, WE REMIT THE DISPUTED ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO, WHO SHALL EXAMINE AND VERIFY THE FACTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS NEVERTHELESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE IN S UBMITTING THE INFORMATION BEFORE THE AO. ACCORDINGLY, WE ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4 ITA NO . 163 /RAN/ 201 5 10 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 / 0 5 /201 8 SD/ - SD/ - ( N.S.SAINI ) ( PAVAN KUMAR GADALE ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER RANCHI , DATED 25 / 05 /201 8 PRAKASH KUMAR MISHRA , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// SR.PS, ITAT, RANCHI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT , CONCERNED 5. DR, ITA T, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE.