Smt. Parvatiben P.Sukhadia, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT.,Circle-12, Ahmedabad

ITA 1732/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0359 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 17-09-2009
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 26-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEETA SHAH
• Assessee Lawyers: JASWANT C SHAH
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 69C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI P. K. BANSAL, AM AND MAHAVIR SINGH, JM) ITA NO. 1732/AHD/2009 A. Y.: 2006-07 SMT. PARVATIBEN P. SUKHADIA, C/O. M/S. BHAVYA CORPORATION, 9, PRAGATI ESTATE, GUJARAT BOTTLING ROAD, RAKHIAL, AHMEDABAD PA NO. AFQPS 1848 K VS THE D. C. I. T., CIRCLE -12, AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI JASWANT C. SHAH, AR RESPONDENT BY SMT. NEETA SHAH, DR O R D E R PER P. K. BANSAL: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)- XX, AHMEDABAD DATE D 13-02-2009 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 BY WHICH THE CI T(A) HAS SUSTAINED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF LOW HOUSE HOLD DRAWING TO THE EXTENT OF RS.1,22,000/-. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WA S PUTTING UP WITH HER FAMILY MEMBERS. HER HUSBAND AND SON HAS MADE DR AWING TO THE EXTENT OF RS.3,10,000/- DURING THE YEAR FOR HOUSEHO LD EXPENSES. THE AO ESTIMATED THE HOUSEHOLD DRAWING OF THE ASSESSEE IN LUMP SUM AT RS.5,40,000/- AND AFTER REDUCING THE DRAWING MADE BY ASSESSEES FAMILY MEMBERS OF RS.3,10,000/- HE MADE ADDITION OF RS.2,3 0,000/-. WHEN THE MATTER WENT BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE CIT(A) ESTIMATED THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AT RS.4,32,000/- AND REDUCED THE ADDITION TO RS.1,22,000/- ITA NO.1732/AHD/2009 SMT. PARVATIBEN P. SUKHADIA 2 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y CONSIDERED THE SAME. WE NOTED THAT NO EVIDENCE WAS BROUGHT ON RECO RD BY THE REVENUE WHICH MAY PROVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED EXPE NSES ON THE HOUSEHOLD DRAWING MUCH MORE THAN WHAT HAS BEEN SHOW N BY HER FAMILY MEMBERS. THE HOUSEHOLD DRAWING HAS MERELY BEEN ESTI MATED BY THE AO WITHOUT POINTING OUT ANY SPECIFIC EXPENDITURE BEING INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF SE CTION 69C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND WE NOTED THAT THERE MUST BE EVID ENCE ON RECORD WHICH MAY PROVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INCURRED EXPE NSES MUCH MORE THAN WHAT HAS BEEN SHOWN BY THE FAMILY MEMBERS. IN CASE THE REVENUE HAS THE EVIDENCE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INCURRED EXP ENSES , THE ONUS WILL GOT SHIFTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO OFFER EXPLANATION AB OUT THE SOURCES OF SUCH EXPENSES TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE AO. APPARENT I S REAL ONUS IS ON THE PERSON WHO ALLEGES APPARENT IS NOT REAL. OUR AFORES AID VIEW IS DULY SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME CO URT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS DAULAT RAM RAWATMALL 87 ITR 349. EVEN NO EVI DENCE WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE BY THE LEARNED DR. WE ACCO RDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DELETE THE ADDITION MAD E BY THE AO. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9.10.09 SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER (P. K. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 9/10/09 LAKSHMIKANT/- ITA NO.1732/AHD/2009 SMT. PARVATIBEN P. SUKHADIA 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD