Satyabir Bharti, Patna V. ITO, Ward -1(1), , Patna

ITA 173/PAT/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7851 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 20-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: D V PATHY
• Keywords: Value adopted by valuation officer; Gift; Revised return

Judgement Text

P A G E 1 | 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PATNA BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO .173 /PAT /2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001 - 2002 SATYABIR BHARTI , HOUSE NO.270, ROAD NO. 3E, NEW PATLIPUTRA COLONY, PATNA VS. ITO, WARD - 1(1), P ATNA PAN/GIR NO. AEOPB 6458 D (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI D.V.PATHY , AR REVENUE BY : SHRI AJAY KUMAR , DR DATE OF HEARING : 1 8 /06/ 2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 /0 6 / 2019 O R D E R PER BENCH THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 1, PATNA DATED 16.5 .2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 01 - 02. 2. GROUND NO.(I), (IV) & (V) ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND HENCE, REQUIRES NO SEPARATION ADJUDICATION BY US. ITA NO.173/PAT/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001 - 2002 P A G E 2 | 5 3. IN GROUND NO.(II), THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.40,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CASH CREDIT. 4. LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.40,000/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER REPRESENTED THE GIFTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS FATHER SHRI GANGA PRASAD BIMAL. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE AMOUNT OF GIFT REPRESENTED RS.15,000/ - PAID BY CHEQUE AND RS.25,000/ - BY CASH. IN SUPPORT OF THIS, HE PRODUCED A DECLARATION BY THE DONOR ALONGWITH RETURN OF INCOME AND BALANCE SHEET . HE SUBMITTED THAT THE GIFT AMOUNT WAS OUT OF SAVINGS OF THE DONOR. THEREFORE, THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITI ON AS CASH CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. REPLYING TO ABOVE, LEARNED D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT THE GIFTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AN ATTEMPT TO ACCOUNT FOR DEFICIT OF CASH IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, WH ICH PUTS THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IN DOUBT. 6. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATERIALS ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.40,000/ - WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS FATHER AS GIFT. ITA NO.173/PAT/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001 - 2002 P A G E 3 | 5 THE IDENTITY OF TH E DONOR IS NOT DOUBTED BY THE REVENUE BUT MERELY QUESTIONED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED RETURN OF INCOME AND BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE, WHEREIN, GIFT OF RS.40,000/ - HAS BEEN SHOWN TO THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, IT IS PROVE D BEYOND DOUBT FROM THE DECLARATION OF THE DONOR, BALANCE SHEET AND RETURN OF INCOME THE DONOR THAT THE GIFT HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISALLOWING THE SAME AND HENCE, WE DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.40,000/ - AND ALLOW THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN GROUND NO.(III), THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,231/ - ON ACCO UNT OF INVESTMENT IN HOUSE PROPERTY TREATING THE SAME AS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL VALUER AND THE DISCLOSURE MADE IN THE REVISED RETURN. 8. LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION AT RS.1,25,703.72 WHEREAS AS PER THE DVO THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION WAS RS.1,54,,987/ - AND, THEREFORE, THE DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNT WAS ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DOUBTED THE ITA NO.173/PAT/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001 - 2002 P A G E 4 | 5 BILLS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE FU RTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS THE ASSESSEE HAD GONE TO MARKET TO PURCHASE THE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL PERSONALLY, THEREFORE, HE MANAGED TO REDUCE THE COST OF MATERIALS AND THE DISCOUNT AMOUNT WAS MENTIONED IN THE FACE OF THE BILL. THEREFORE, THERE IS DIFFER ENCE I N THE BILL AND THE AMOUNT SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED IN THE YEAR 2001 AND THE DVO HAS VALUED THE HOUSE LATER ON. THE ENHANCEMENT IN THE CONSTRUCTION VALUE SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION ON THE BASIS OF INFLATION YEAR AFTER YEAR. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RESTRICTED THE ADDITION AMOUNT TO RS.15,231.73 BEING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN T HE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME AND THE AMOUNT SHOWN IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME(WRONGLY MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS RS.1,40,934/ - AS VALUATION MADE BY DVO) . 9. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 10. WE FIND FORCE IN THE SUBMISSION OF LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE COST OF MATERIAL MAY HAVE INCREASED YEAR AFTER YEA R AND THE VALUATION OF THE BUILDING WILL ACCORDINGLY ENHANCE AS AGAINST THE EXPENDITURE SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.173/PAT/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001 - 2002 P A G E 5 | 5 11. LEARNED A.R. SUBMITTED A LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE TO CONTEND THAT THE PAYMENT WAS MADE THROUGH STATE BANK OF PATNA ON DIFFERENT DAT ES TOTALLING TO RS.1,25,703.72 / - . IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE UPHOLD THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION TO RS.15,231.73 AND DISMISS THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 12. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRON OUNCED ON 18 /0 6 /2019. SD/ - SD/ - (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) ( CHANDRA MOHAN GARG ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER PATNA ; DATED 18 /0 6 /209 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER SR.P VT.SECRETARY ITAT, PATNA 1. THE APPELLANT : SATYABIR BHARTI, HOUSE NO.270, ROAD NO. 3E, NEW PATLIPUTRA COLONY, PATNA 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, WARD - 1(1), PATNA 3. THE CIT(A) - 1 , PATNA 4. PR.CIT - 1, PATNA 5. DR, ITAT, PATNA 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//