Mrs. Akansha Sharda, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Noida

ITA 1634/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2929 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 01-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Source of fund

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE-PRESIDENT ITA NO.1634/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 AKANSHA SHARDA, C/O AKHILESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE, CHAMBER NO.206-207, ANSAL SATYAM, RDC RAJ NAGAR, GHAZIABAD. PAN: BILPS0419K VS. ITO, WARD-1(1), NOIDA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AKHILESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE DEPTT. BY : MS BEDOBANI, DR DATE OF HEARING : 01.06.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02.06.2017 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 25.01.2016 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAI NST THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS.18,95,000/-. ITA NO.1634/DEL/2016 2 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THIS ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS T HAT A LOAN WAS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S MONEI MATTERS AMOUNTING TO RS .18,95,000/- WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY TRANSFERRED TO M/S SHARDA FORGING AND STAMPING PVT. LTD. THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED UPON TO PRODUCE A PARTNER O F M/S MONIE MATTERS. SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR GUPTA APPEARED ON BEHALF OF M/S MONIE MATTERS. HIS STATEMENT WAS RECORDED BY THE AO, WHO CONFIRMED TO HAVE ADVANCED THE LOAN AMOUNTING TO RS.10 LAC TO THE ASSESSEE AND RS. 8,95,000/- TO SHRI ANIRUDH SHARMA, HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE. AS THE IN TEREST WAS NOT CHARGED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THE LOAN WAS NOT GE NUINE. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED A GAINST THE ADDITION. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE AND HER HUSB AND OPERATED A JOINT BANK ACCOUNT IN WHICH A SUM OF RS.18,95,000/- WAS DEPOSI TED FOR A FURTHER TRANSFER TO M/S SHARDA FORTING AND STAMPING PVT. LT D. ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED SHRI P RADEEP KUMAR GUPTA, A PARTNER OF M/S MONIE MATTERS WHOSE STATEMENT WAS RE CORDED ON 26.09.2014. A COPY OF SUCH STATEMENT HAS BEEN PLACE D AT PAGE 14 ONWARDS OF THE PAPER BOOK. IN RESPONSE TO A QUESTION WHETH ER THE AMOUNT WAS ITA NO.1634/DEL/2016 3 ADVANCED TO THE ASSESSEE, SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR GUPTA SUBMITTED THAT A SUM OF RS.10 LAC WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND RS.8,95, 000/- TO SHRI ANIRUDH SHARDA THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. ON A FURTHER QUES TION, IT WAS STATED THAT THE AMOUNT WAS STILL DUE AND THE FIRM DISCLOSED THI S AMOUNT AS RECEIVABLE IN ITS BALANCE SHEET. ON ANOTHER QUESTION AS TO WHY N O INTEREST WAS RECEIVED, IT WAS REPLIED THAT INTEREST WILL BE RECEIVED AT THE T IME OF THE RETURN OF MONEY. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT M/S MONIE MATTER WAS A R EGULAR INCOME-TAX ASSESSEE FILING RETURNS FOR MORE THAN 10 YEARS. A COPY OF THE RETURN FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, BEING THE YEAR U NDER CONSIDERATION, WAS FILED ALONG WITH THE BALANCE SHEET IN WHICH THE AMO UNT WAS SHOWN AS RECEIVABLE. IT IS APPARENT FROM THE STATEMENT OF S HRI PRADEEP KUMAR GUPTA THAT NOT ONLY THE ADVANCING OF LOAN WAS CONFIRMED, BUT ALSO ALL THE QUERIES OF THE AO WERE SATISFACTORILY REPLIED. M/S MONIE MA TTERS IS A FIRM ENGAGED IN ADVANCING LOANS. RETURN FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESS MENT YEAR WAS FILED BY THE SAID FIRM IN WHICH THE AMOUNT ADVANCED TO THE A SSESSEE WAS SHOWN AS RECEIVABLE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM UNABLE TO APPRECIATE AS TO HOW THE AMOUNT CAN BE CONSIDERED AS NON-GENUINE. MERELY BECAUSE INTEREST WAS NOT RECEIVED, CANNOT BE A REASON TO CAST DOUBT ON T HE GENUINENESS OF THE LOAN, MORE SO WHEN THE PARTNER OF M/S MONIE MATTERS SPECIFICALLY ITA NO.1634/DEL/2016 4 SUBMITTED THAT THE INTEREST WILL BE RECEIVED ALONG WITH THE REPAYMENT OF LOAN. I, THEREFORE, ORDER FOR THE DELETION OF ADDIT ION OF RS.18,95,000/- SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 5. ANOTHER GROUND IS AGAINST THE SUSTENANCE OF ADDI TION OF RS.50,231/-. THE FACTS APROPOS THIS GROUND AS RECORDED ON THE LA ST PAGE OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ARE THAT THE AO FOUND VARIOUS CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT TOTALING RS.24,44,000/-. IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE R ECEIVED SALARY OF RS.3,15,000/-, OTHER INCOME OF RS.1,08,550/- AND LO AN OF RS.18,95,000, TOTAL OF WHICH STOOD AT RS.23,94,246/-. THE DIFFER ENTIAL AMOUNT OF RS.50,231/- (RS.24,44,777/- MINUS RS.23,94,246/-) W AS ADDED. THE LD. CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE ADDITION. 6. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE RELE VANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.50,2 31/- HAS BEEN MADE SIMPLY BY SEEING THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT VIS-A-VIS THE RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE. WHAT IS RELEVANT TO NOTE IN THIS CASE IS THAT THIS BANK ACCOUNT WAS, ADMITTEDLY, OPERATED JOINTLY BY THE ASSESSEE AND HE R HUSBAND. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CONSIDERED ONLY THE RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE BY IGNORING THAT THIS ACCOUNT WAS JOINTLY OPERATED BY THE ASSESSEES HUSBAND ITA NO.1634/DEL/2016 5 ALSO WHOSE SOURCES OF INCOME WERE NOT TAKEN INTO CO NSIDERATION. APART FROM THAT, THERE ARE CERTAIN WITHDRAWALS ALSO FROM THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. IN T HE GIVEN CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM SATISFIED THAT THE AMOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK IS DULY EXPLAINED. THIS ADDITION IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 7. THE FIRST TWO GROUNDS WERE NOT PRESSED BY THE LD. AR. THE SAME ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWE D. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 2 ND JUNE, 2017. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) VICE-P RESIDENT DATED:02 ND JUNE, 2017. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI