Sh. Sarfraj Khan, Meerut V. ACIT, Meerut

ITA 1707/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 170720114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 25-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R R KUMAR
• Keywords: Business income; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I. C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1707/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SH. SARFRAJ KHAN, VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MOGRA BUILDING, MEERUT CHAKRATA ROAD, SAHARANPUR GIR / PAN:AIGPK5374D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VINOD KUMAR GOEL, ADV., RESPONDENT BY : SHRI BRR KUMAR, SR. DR ORDER PER T.S. KAPOOR, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 15.03.2013. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE AS SESSEE IS THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) BY WHICH HE HAD CONFIRMED THE ADDITION O F RS.8.50 LACS BEING UNEXPLAINED AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ON VARIOUS DATES. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E FILED RETURN DECLARING INCOME OF RS.95,419/- ALONG WITH AGRICULTURAL INCOM E OF RS.5,74,464/-. THE A.O. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, REDUCED THE AGR ICULTURAL INCOME BY SMALL AMOUNT OF RS.21,466/-. HOWEVER, HE MADE AN A DDITION OF RS.8.50 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS OF CASH ON VARIO US DATES IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. THE A.O. HAD OBSERVED THAT IN ALL, AN AMO UNT OF RS.24.30 LACS WAS DEPOSITED ON VARIOUS DATES OUT OF WHICH RS.8.50 LAC S REMAINED UNEXPLAINED 2 ITA NO.1707/DEL/2013 AND, THEREFORE, HE MADE ADDITION THEREOF. THE ASSE SSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS. HOWE VER, LD. CIT(A) DID NOT AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND U PHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL B EFORE US. 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSES SEE WAS HAVING BUSINESS INCOME AND WAS NOT MAINTAINING BOOKS OF AC COUNT AND HAD OFFERED HIS INCOME UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AF. T HE A.O. HAD ALSO ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME EXCEPT FO R A SMALL ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL EXPENSES AND NEITHER THE A. O. NOR LD. CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND BUSINESS INC OME FOR THE PURPOSE OF CALCULATION OF CASH AVAILABLE FOR DEPOSITS IN THE B ANK ACCOUNT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAD REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ALSO. OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO PAPER BOOK PAGE S 8 TO 16 AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THE A.O. AND LD. CIT(A) HAD IGN ORED TO ACCEPT THE AGREEMENT BY WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED VARIOU S ADVANCES. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSEE WAS NOT LIABLE TO MAINTAIN BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS HE HAD OFFERED INCOME TAX UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AF. 4. LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND HEAVILY RELIED UPON T HE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE THROUG H THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) WHILE DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, DID NOT CONSIDER THE INCOME RECEIVED BY T HE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND BUSINESS INCOME. THIS ASPE CT HAS NOT EVEN BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE A.O. MOREOVER, LD. A.R. HAD INVI TED OUR ATTENTION TO CERTAIN AGREEMENTS WHICH WERE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN FILED BEFORE THE A.O. 3 ITA NO.1707/DEL/2013 BUT THE SAME DID NOT FIND MENTION IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OR IN LD. CIT(A)S ORDER. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BE RE-ADJUDICATED BY A.O. WHO WILL PASS APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT ORDER AFTER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE AMOU NT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND BUSINESS INCOME AND OTHER EVIDENCES TO ARRIVE A T THE AMOUNT OF CASH AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR DEPOSITING IN THE B ANK ACCOUNT. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITY WILL BE AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH NOV., 2014. SD./- SD./- ( I. C. SUDHIR) (T.S. KAPO OR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 14 TH 2014 SP COPY FORWARDED TO:- THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT THE CIT (A)-, NEW DELHI. THE DR, ITAT, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DEL HI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER (ITAT, NEW DELHI). S.NO. DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATION 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON SR. PS/PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR SR. PS/PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER AM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS SR. PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT SR. PS/PS 7 FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK SR. PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO HEAD CLERK 9 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO A.R. 10 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER