Dr. Nirmalendu Kanjilal, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 5(5), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1736/KOL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5514 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 1995-1996
• Appeal Filed On: 06-09-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PIYUSH KOLHE
• Assessee Lawyers: S M SURANA
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources

Judgement Text

1 , B , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH- B , KO LKATA [ . . . . . .. . , ,, , . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , , , , '# ] BEFORE SHRI B.R.MITTAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI C.D. RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ $ $ $ / ITA NO. 1736 (KOL) OF 2010 %& '( / ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96 DR. NIRMALENDU KANJILAL , KOLKATA. (PAN-AGCPK8453H) INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(5), KOLKATA. (+, / APPELLANT ) - % - - VERSUS - (/0+,/ RESPONDENT ) +, 1 2 '/ FOR THE APPELLANT: / SRI S.M. SURANA /0+, 1 2 ' / FOR THE RESPONDENT: / SRI PIYUSH KOLHE '3 / ORDER ( . . . . . .. . ), (B.R.MITTAL), JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96 AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. C.I.T.(A)-XXXVI, KOLKATA DATED 29/07/2010. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER :- THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS.68,361/- ON ACCOUNT INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES WITHOUT GOI NG ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS EVIDENT FROM RECORDS, AND LD. CIT(A) IS ALSO NOT JU STIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ABOVE ADDITION AND DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT CONSIDER ING MY SUBMISSION AND DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A MEDICAL PRACTITIONER. ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS MADE U/S.143(3 )/147 OF THE ACT DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,53,420/- AS AGAINST RS.85,060/ - RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE A.O. ON THE GROUND OF NON-COMPLIANCE TO EXPLAIN THE DEPO SITS IN ALLAHABAD BANK AND FOR LACK OF CASH FLOW STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF L OAN TREATED THE EXCESS DEPOSIT OF RS.68,361/- AS ASSESSEES INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED S OURCE AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. C.I.T.(A), THE ASSESSE E STATED THAT HE RECEIVED CASH LOAN OF RS.78,000/- FROM DIFFERENT PARTIES ON DIFFERENT DATES, WHO WERE HIS FRIENDS AND RELATIVES. CONFIRMATIONS IN RESPECT OF SUCH LOAN A ND CASH FLOW STATEMENT WERE ALSO FILED. 2 THE LD. C.I.T.(A) HOWEVER OBSERVED THAT BEFORE THE A.O. THE ASSESSEE STATED TO HAVE RECEIVED LOAN OF RS.58,000/- WHICH DIFFERS FROM THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT SHOWING LOAN OF RS.78,000/-. HE WAS, THEREFORE, OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBSTANTIATED THE SOURCES FOR THE CASH DEPOSITS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNTS, I.E. THE IDENTITY OF CREDITORS, THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND, ACCORDINGLY, CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.68,361/- MADE BY THE A .O. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE S LEARNED COUNSEL FILED COPIES OF BANK STATEMENT WITH ALLAHABAD BANK AND LOAN CONFIRM ATION FROM FIVE DIFFERENT PARTIES RANGING FROM RS.13,000/- TO RS.18,000/-. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT BANK STATEMENT, CASH FLOW STATEMENT AND LOAN CONFIRMATIONS WERE FILED BE FORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE LD. C.I.T.(A) WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SAME IN PROPE R PERSPECTIVE WRONGLY CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.68,361/- AS ASSESSEES INCOME FROM U NDISCLOSED SOURCES. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, REL IED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL PLACED BEFORE US. ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE FIND THA T ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE FILED CASH FLOW STATEMENT AND LOAN CONFIRMATION FROM THE PARTIES, B UT NO ENQUIRY HAS BEEN MADE TO FIND OUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS FROM THE LO AN CREDITORS. KEEPING IN VIEW THE SMALL QUANTUM OF LOAN AND CONFIRMATIONS DULY FURNIS HED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF SUCH LOAN TAKEN FROM FRIENDS AND RELATIVES, WE FIND NO REASON TO DISBELIEVE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DELETE THE A DDITION OF RS.68,361/- SUSTAINED BY THE LD. C.I.T.(A) AS ASSESSEES INCOME FROM UNDISCL OSED SOURCES. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. 4 '3 #5' 6 5% 7 48 THIS ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- ( . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . ) '# ( . . . . . .. . ) (C.D.RAO) , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (B.R.MITTAL) , JUDICIAL MEMBER ( (( (!# !# !# !#) )) ) DATE: 22-11-2010 3 $ $ $ $ / ITA NO. 1736 (KOL) OF 2010 '3 1 /9 :'9';- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. +, / THE APPELLANT : DR. NIRMALENDU KANJILAL, C/O. S.N.AGARWALA & CO. , 161/1, M.G. ROAD, ROOM NO.23, KOLKATA-700 007. 2 /0+, / THE RESPONDENT : I.T.O., WARD-5(5), KOLKATA. 3. 3% () : THE CIT(A)-XXXVI, KOLKATA. 4. 3%/ THE CIT, KOL- 5 ?7 /% / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA 6 GUARD FILE . 09 // TRUE COPY, '3%5/ BY ORDER, (DKP) @ A / DEPUTY REGISTRAR .