ITO. Ward-11(1), Hyderabad V. K. Jhansi Lakshmi, Hyderabad

ITA 1696/HYD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 61912 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-05-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B V PRASAD REDDY
• Keywords: Peak credit

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1696/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, APPELLANT WARD - 11(1), HYDERABAD. VS. K. JHANSI LAKSHMI, RESPONDENT HYDERABAD (PAN AAIFA3903C) APPELLANT BY : MR.B. V. PRASAD REDDY RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 08/05/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 0 6/06/2012 ORDER PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M.: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-VI, HYDERABAD, DATED 25/07/2011 FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE RETUR N OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 09/02/2009 ADMITTING AN INCOME O F RS. 1,49,600/-. AS PER THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEES ACCOUNT WITH INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, THERE WAS A PEAK CREDIT OF RS. 9,64, 799/- ON 08/01/2007. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FROM THE ASSESSEE ABOUT THE SAID PEAK CREDIT, THE AO ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTE R IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). 2 ITA NO. 1696/HYD/2011 K. JHANSI LAKSHMI 3. THE CIT(A) HELD THAT THE TOTAL DEPOSITS INTO THE ACCOUNT DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR WAS RS. 34,04,486/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT SHE WAS ENGAGED IN WHOLESALE AND RETAIL FIREWOOD BUSINE SS AND HER TURNOVER DURING THE YEAR WAS RS. 38,58,443/-, I.E. SLIGHTLY MORE THAN THE PEAK CREDIT. SHE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE NATURE OF THE BU SINESS IS SUCH THAT IT IS GENERALLY CARRIED IN CASH. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RETURNED INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY OF RS. 48,650/- AND INCOME FROM OTHE R SOURCES OF RS. 13,520/-. IT WOULD THEREFORE BE REASONABLE TO PRESU ME THAT THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WERE MADE OUT OF HER BUSINESS T URNOVER AND OTHER INCOMES. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS, THE CIT(A) FINALLY HELD THAT IN ANY EVENT, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE DEPOSI TS ARE FROM SOURCES OTHER THAN THOSE ALREADY DISCLOSED BY HER IN THE RE TURN AND, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE IS DELETED. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE REVENU E IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US, RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1)THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS PEAK CREDIT WHEN NO TECHNICAL GROUNDS ARE MADE BY T HE ASSESSEE. 2) THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADD ITION ONLY ON PRESUMPTION THAT THE DEPOSITS IN BANK WERE OUT OF D ISCLOSED INCOME WITHOUT GIVING SPECIFIC FINDINGS OR JUSTIFICATION. 3) THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO REFER THE INFOR MATION IF ANY PRODUCED RELATING TO SOURCES OF CASH DEPOSITS IN BA NK TO AO AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY INFORMATION AT THE TI ME OF ASSESSMENT, SO THAT THE CONTENTION THAT THE SOURCES ARE OUT OF BUSINESS TURNOVER ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WOULD HA VE BEEN EXAMINED. 4) THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO WHILE ADMITTING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HE R. 5. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-ASSESS EE AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, HOWEVER, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE O F THESE APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND ON MERITS. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR MR. B.V. PRASAD RED DY AND PERUSED THE RECORD. AS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED DR THAT THE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO REFER THE INFORMATION, IF ANY, PRODUCED RELATING TO SOURCES OF CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK TO AO AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROD UCED ANY INFORMATION AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT, SO THAT THE CONTENTION T HAT THE SOURCES ARE OUT OF BUSINESS TURNOVER ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE W OULD HAVE BEEN 3 ITA NO. 1696/HYD/2011 K. JHANSI LAKSHMI EXAMINED. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO WHILE ADMITTING THE SUBMISSIO NS OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HER AND WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 9 ,64,799/- ON ACCOUNT OF PEAK CREDIT, MADE BY THE AO. IN THIS VIEW OF TH E MATTER, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO HER FILE WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO TO EXAMINE THE INFORMATION/EVIDENCE RELATING TO THE SOURCES OF CA SH DEPOSITS IN BANK, WHICH WAS PUT FORTH BEFORE HER BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06/06/2012. SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (ASHA VIJ AYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 6 TH JUNE, 2012 KV COPY TO:- 1) INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD 2) K. JHANSI LAKSHMI, H.NO. 88/2, 3 RD PHASE, MIG BUS STOP, KPHB COLONY, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD 3) THE CIT (A)-VI, HYDERABAD 4) THE CIT-V, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T .A.T., HYDERABAD