The ITO, Ward-6(5)., Ahmedabad V. Shri Ashvinkumar Mohanlal Patel, Ahmedabad

ITA 1635/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6147 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 8 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 14-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 27-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: CHHAJED
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO S .: 1547, 1635 /AHD/201 2 & CO NO.149/AHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008 - 09 PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR AM ] I.T.A. NO 1547/AHD/12 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 ASHVIN MOHANLAL PATEL .... ........................ ....APPELLANT CARE OF : GL 2 FASHIONS, LL 13,14 MANORATHI COMPLEX, NR SATTADHAR ROAD SOLA ROAD, GHATLODIA, AHMEDABAD 380 061 [PAN: ALZPP0526G] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(5), AHMEDABAD .. .RESPONDENT I.T.A. NO 1635/AHD/12 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(5), AHMEDABAD .... .... .................... ....APPELLANT VS. ASHWIN MOHANLAL PATEL .. .RESPONDENT CARE OF : GL 2 FASHIONS, LL 13,14 MANORATHI COMPLEX, NR SATTADHAR ROAD SOLA ROAD, GHATLODIA, AHMEDABAD 380 061 [PAN: ALZPP0526G] CO NO. 149 /AHD/201 2 ARISING OUT OF I.T. A. NO 1547/AHD/12 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 ASHVIN MOHANLAL PATEL .... ...................CROSS OBJECTOR CARE OF : GL 2 FASHIONS, LL 13,14 MANO RATHI COMPLEX, NR SATTADHAR ROAD SOLA ROAD, GHATLODIA, AHMEDABAD 380 061 [PAN: ALZPP0526G] VS. INCOME TAX O FFICER WARD 6(5), AHMEDABAD .. .RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: M S CHHAJED FOR THE ASSESSEE DINESH SINGH FOR THE REVENUE HEARING CONCLUDED ON: 1 4 /0 2 /1 7 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : 26 /04 /1 7 I.T.A. NO S .: 1547, 1635 /AHD/201 2 & CO NO.149/AHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008 - 09 PAGE 2 OF 4 O R D E R 1. THESE CROSS APPEALS AND CROSS OBJECT ION PERTAIN TO THE SAME ASSESSEE, WERE HEARD TOGETHER, AND ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SAME ORDER DATED 2 ND MAY 2012 PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. AS A MATTE R OF CONVENIENCE, THEREFORE, BOTH THE CROSS APPEALS AS ALSO THE CROSS OBJECTION, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. AS FAR AS CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE FAIRLY STATES THAT IT SIMPLY ASSAILS THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE SAME POINT AND IN THE SAME MANNER AS IS IT ASSAILED IN ASSESSEE S APPEAL. THE CROSS OBJECTION, THEREFORE, DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY INDEPENDENT GRIEVANCE REQUIRING OUR ADJUDICATION ON MERIT S. THE CROSS OBJECTION IS THUS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. 3. AS FOR THE GRIEVANCES RAISED IN THE CROSS APPEALS, WHILE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS AGGRIEVED OF THE RELIEF OF RS 23,17,117 GRANTED BY THE CIT(A), OUT OF THE ADDITION OF RS. 25,42,720 MADE BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS, THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED OF THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS 2,25,603 CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). WE WILL TAKE UP THESE GRIEVANCES TOGETHER. 4. THE RELEVANT MATERIAL FACTS ARE AS FOLLOWS. THIS CASE WAS SELEC TED FOR SCRUTINY ON THE BASIS OF CASS . DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE, AS PER AIR INFORMATION, CASH DEPOSITS AGGREGATING TO RS 25,42,720 IN AXIS BANK. AS THE ASSESSE WAS NOT ABLE TO FURNISH DETAILS EV IDENCING SOURCE OF THESE CASH DEPOSITS, ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS 25,42,720 WAS ADDED TO INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT TH E TIME GIVEN FOR FURNISHING THE REQUISITE INFORMATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS GROSSLY INADEQUATE. IT WAS THEN SUBMITTED THAT AGGREGATE OF DEPOSITS MADE IN TWO SAVING BANK ACCOUNTS, THAT THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINS WITH AXIS BANK, IS ONLY RS 20,02,700 A ND THIS FIGURE IS CORROBORATED BY THE BANK STATEMENTS OF THE REL A TED ACCOUNT S. IT WAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSE HAD WITHDRAWN RS 11,41,147 AND RS 2,55,000, AND, TO THAT EXTENT, THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT STOOD EXPLAINED. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE CASH I.T.A. NO S .: 1547, 1635 /AHD/201 2 & CO NO.149/AHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008 - 09 PAGE 3 OF 4 RECEIPTS FROM SHREE MAHAKALI AUTO SERVICE, TO THE EXTENT OF RS 2,30,000, AND CASH RECEIPT ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME WAS RS 1,50,950. ALLOWING CREDIT FOR THESE AMOUNTS, THE CIT(A) TREATED THE AMOUNT OF RS 17,77,097 AS EXPLAINED, OUT OF RS 22, 02,700 DEPOSITED IN CASH BY THE ASSESSEE IN AXIS BANK ACCOUNTS, AND CONFIRMED THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS 2,25,603. NONE OF THE PARTIES IS SATISFIED - THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS AGGRIEVED OF THE RELIEF OF RS 23,17,117 GRANTED BY THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRI EVED OF THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS 2,25,603 CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). BOTH THE PARTIES ARE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICAB LE LEGAL POSITION. 6. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PROCEEDED ON THE BASIS THAT ENTIRE CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT CONSTITUTE UNEXPLAINED CREDITS, BUT THAT APPROACH IS CLEARLY INCORRECT. AS LONG AS THE ASSESSE CAN REASONABLY EXPLAIN THE SOURCE O F CASH WITH HIM, THERE CANNOT BE ANY ADDITION IN RESPECT OF SUCH CASH BEING DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. IN THE PRESENT CASE, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS, IN A VERY WELL REASONED AND DETAILED ORDER, HELD THAT THE SOURCES TO THE EXTENT OF RS 17,77,097 STAND EXPLA INED. IT IS NOT EVEN THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE MONIES SO AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE WERE USED FOR SOME OTHER PURPOSE. THE DETAILED CASH FLOW STATEMENT, BANK STATEMENTS AND COPIES OF ACCOUNTS WERE ALSO PRODUCED BEFORE ME AND I HAVE PERUSED THE SAME. I SEE NO INFIRMITY IN THE APPROACH ADOPTED BY THE CIT(A) OR IN THE CONCLUSIONS ARRIVED AT BY HIM . AS REGARDS THE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS 2,25,603 BEING CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) TOO, I SEE NO REASONS TO INTERFERE IN THE MATTER AS THERE IS NO COGENT JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SOURCE OF THESE DEPOSITS. IN VIEW OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, AS ALSO BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, WE APPROVE THE CONCLUSIONS ARRIVED AT BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE MATTER. 7. IN THE RESULTS, BOTH THE APPEALS, AS ALSO CROSS OBJECTIONS, ARE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 26 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2017. SD/ - PRAMOD KUMAR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: AHMEDABAD, THE 26 TH DAY OF APRI L , 2017. I.T.A. NO S .: 1547, 1635 /AHD/201 2 & CO NO.149/AHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008 - 09 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD