ACIT, Kota V. SHRI RAGHUVEER SINGH, BUNDI

ITA 174/JPR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99318 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRAVAN KR GUPTA ADV DHK
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF; D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA -@ ITA NO. 174/JP/2012 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA. CUKE VS. RAGHUVEER SINGH, BAHADUR SINGH CIRCLE, BUNDI. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO. AAOPH 7552 E VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI AJAY MALIK (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SHRAVAN KR. GUPTA (ADV) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 08/09/2015. MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17/09/2015. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER T.R. MEENA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29/12/2011 OF THE LEARNED C.I.T.(A), KOTA FOR A.Y. 2 007-08. THE EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- (I) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 21,28,000/- MADE O N ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT; 2 ITA NO. 174/JP/2012 ACIT VS RAGHUVEER SINGH (II) DELETING THE UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT OF RS. 6, 00,000/- EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR. 2. BOTH THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL ARE INTERLINKED A ND ARE AGAINST DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 21,28,000/- AND RS. 6, 00,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT AND THE ASSESSEE FAI LED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN ON 31/3/2008 AT RS. 83,313/-. THE CASE WAS SCR UTINIZED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). THE L D ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT DURING THE YEAR, THE ASSESSEE HAD DEP OSITED CASH OF RS. 21.28 LACS IN MARCH, 2007 IN THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN, SABJI MANDI, KOTA., WHICH INCLUDES CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 15.28 LACS ON 06/ 3/2007, RS. 6.00 LACS ON 16/3/2007 AND RS. 6.00 LACS ON 28/3/2007. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER GAVE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ON THIS ISSUE. IT WAS ARGUED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT RS. 15.28 LACS DE POSITED ON 06/3/2007 WERE WITHDRAWN IN CASH ON 05/3/2007 FROM AOP M/S PUTT AN SINGH & PARTY. THE ASSESSEE FILED COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED IN THE BOOKS OF M/S PUTTAN SINGN & PARTY . HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT, HOWEVER, AT THE SAME TIME, THERE IS DEPOSIT OF CASH IN THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE ON 01/4/2006. THE ASSESSEE ARGUED BEFORE HI M THAT CLOSING CASH 3 ITA NO. 174/JP/2012 ACIT VS RAGHUVEER SINGH AVAILABLE FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31/3/2007 WAS CASH AVA ILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AS OPENING AS ON 01/4/2007. THE ASSESSEE A LSO FURNISHED COPY OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31/3/2007. AS PER THIS BALAN CE SHEET, THE ASSESSEE HAS BALANCE OF RS. 23,19,277/-. THE LD ASSESSING OFF ICER HELD THAT THE CASH EXCESS RS. 50,000/- IS LIABLE TO BE ADDED IN T HE WEALTH TAX. SINCE, THERE IS NO LIABILITY AGAINST ASSETS OF THE ASSESSE E AND HIS WEALTH IS MORE THAN RS. 15 LACS, IS LIABLE TO FILE RETURN OF WEALTH . HOWEVER, NO SUCH RETURN WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. REGARDING DEPOSIT OF RS. 6 LACS DATED 16/3/2007, THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AS SESSING OFFICER THAT HE HAD TAKEN UNSECURED LOAN FROM SHRI NARENDRA SING H AND FILED COPY OF RETURN IN SUPPORT TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE L OAN BUT THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THE RETURN WAS SHOWING O NLY INCOME OF RS. 72,860/-, THEREFORE, CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE SAME HA S NOT BEEN PROVED BY THE ASSESSEE. ANOTHER 6 LACS RUPEES DEPOSITED ON 28 /3/2007, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THA T HE HAD MADE WITHDRAWAL OF RS. 6 LACS ON 19/3/2007 FOR MAKING DEP OSIT WITH AOP M/S SATYA BHAN SINGH & PARTY. SINCE THE AOP REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE DEPOSIT IN CASH, THEREFORE, THIS CASH WAS RE-DEPOSITED ON 28/03 /2007 IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND TRANSFERRED THIS AMOUNT TO THE AOP THRO UGH CHEQUE. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THIS C ASH DEPOSIT AS THERE 4 ITA NO. 174/JP/2012 ACIT VS RAGHUVEER SINGH WAS A INTERVAL FROM 19/3/2007 TO 28/3/2007. FURTHER MOST OF THE TRANSACTION WITH AOP WAS IN CASH. THEREFORE, HE MADE ADDITION OF RS. 21.28 LACS AND RS. 6 LACS IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSE SSEE. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER, THE ASSESSEE THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), WHO HAD ALLOWED THE A PPEAL BY OBSERVING THAT THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION PRIMARI LY NOT ACCEPTING THE OPENING CASH BALANCE OF RS. 23,19,277/- ON THE GROU ND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED WEALTH TAX RETURN. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE RETURN FOR A.Y. 2006-07 WAS FILED ON 26/03/2007 CLEARLY SHOWS THAT A CASH BALANCE OF RS. 23,19,277/- AS ON 31/3/2006. HE FURTHER HELD THAT N ON-FILING OF WEALTH TAX RETURN FOR THE A.Y. 2006-07 CANNOT BE BASIS FOR ADD ITION UNDER INCOME TAX LAW FOR A.Y. 2007-08. THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF WITHDRAWAL FOR RS. 21.28 LACS. FOR DEPOSIT OF RS. 6 L ACS ON 28/03/2007, HE HELD THAT SHRI NARENDRA SINGH HAD SHOWN TOTAL INCOM E OF RS. 1,49,360/- AND HAD SHOWN THE LOAN OF RS. 6 LACS TO THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BALANCE SHEET. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF T HE CREDITOR CANNOT BE DOUBTED. THEREFORE, HE ALLOWED THE APPEAL. 4. NOW REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD DR VEHE MENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AT TH E OUTSET, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED THE ARGUMENTS MADE BEFO RE THE LD CIT(A). HE 5 ITA NO. 174/JP/2012 ACIT VS RAGHUVEER SINGH FURTHER ARGUED THAT THE FACTS ON WHICH THE LD CIT(A) RELIED HAD NOT BEEN CONTROVERTED BY THE LD DR. THE ASSESSEE IS A REGULAR INCOME TAX ASSESSEE FOR LAST 15 YEARS. HE IS REGULARLY FILING RETURN FO R INCOME TAX WITH BALANCE SHEET AND CAPITAL ACCOUNT, FOR WHICH HE FILED COPY O F RETURN FROM A.Y. 2003-04 TO 2007-08 IN PAPER BOOK, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DOUBTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE ONLY MADE BASIS OF ADDITION T HAT NO WEALTH TAX RETURN WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BUT TRANSACTION IS LINKED WITH THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF M/S PUTTAN SIGH & PARTY. FURTHER IT IS ADMITTED FACT THAT CLOSING CASH BALANCE OF A.Y. 2006-07 IS OPENING CAS H BALANCE OF A.Y. 2007-08. HE FURTHER RELIED ON THE VARIOUS CASE LAWS REFERRED IN HIS WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. THEREFORE, HE PRAYED TO CONFIRM THE OR DER OF THE LD CIT(A). FOR RS. 6 LACS, HE ALSO REITERATED THE ARGUMENTS M ADE BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED HIS OWN MONEY AVAIL ABLE WITH HIM, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO PROVE THE SOU RCE OF OWN MONEY. HE FURTHER RELIED ON THE VARIOUS DECISIONS OF VARIOUS HON'BLE HIGH COURTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HIS INITIAL BURDEN ON IDENT ITY ESTABLISHED, GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION AND CAPACITY. THEREFORE, HE PRAYED TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESS EE FROM THE 6 ITA NO. 174/JP/2012 ACIT VS RAGHUVEER SINGH ASSESSMENT STAGE HAS EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF CASH D EPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NOT CONTROVERT ED THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION WITH ANY EVIDENCE AVAILABLE WITH HIM. THE LD CIT(A) HAS VERIFIED THE RETURN OF SHRI NARENDRA SINGH WHERE SUB STANTIAL INCOME HAS BEEN DISCLOSED AND ALSO BALANCE WAS AVAILABLE IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT. THE OPENING CASH WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLA IN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED AS HAS BEEN SHOWN IN A CLOSING YEAR A S CASH BALANCE AS ON 31/3/2006. THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD C IT(A) ON BOTH THE GROUNDS. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17/09/2015. SD/- SD/- YFYR DQEKJ VH-VKJ-EHUK (LALIET KUMAR) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 17/09/2015 RANJAN* VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KOTA. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- SHRI RAGHUVEER SINGH, BUNDI. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 7 ITA NO. 174/JP/2012 ACIT VS RAGHUVEER SINGH 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.174/JP/2012) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR