Ponnambalam Thirumurugan, Chennai V. DCIT, Corporate Circle, Chennai

ITA 180/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5197 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: C H VINOBHA GANDHI B
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! .#$#%, ' !( BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.180/CHNY/2018 % *% / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SHRI PONNAMBALAM THIRUMURUGAN, NO.14/11, SAMPOORNA APARTMENTS, RAJAGOPALAN STREET, WEST MAMBALAM, CHENNAI - 600 033. PAN : ABYPT 8074 G V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2), CHENNAI. (,-/ APPELLANT) (./,-/ RESPONDENT) ,- 0 1 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI C.H. VINOBHA GANDHI, ADVOCAT E ./,- 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT 2 0 3' / DATE OF HEARING : 07.06.2018 45* 0 3' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.06.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -3, CHENNA I, DATED 27.10.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2 I.T.A. NO.180/CHNY/18 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS ADDIT ION OF 81,22,906/- UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 3. SHRI C.H. VINOBHA GANDHI, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A DIRECTOR IN TWO ED UCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, NAMELY, RLT ACADEMY AND SHANTHINIKETH AN SCHOOL. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE ASSESSEE OPENED S EPARATE BANK ACCOUNTS IN THE NAME OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED DOCUMENTS TO COMPLY WITH KYC NORMS AND THE PA N DETAILS. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE STUDENTS FEES CO LLECTED FROM RLT ACADEMY AND SHANTHINIKETHAN SCHOOL WERE CREDITED IN THE RESPECTIVE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE SCHOOL. ACCORDING T O THE LD. COUNSEL, THE BANK WRONGLY CONNECTED THE INDIVIDUAL BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE INSTEAD OF THE SCHOOL PAN NUMBER. THE MISTAKE CREPT IN THE BANK WAS ADMITTED BY THE CITY UNION BANK AND THE SAME WAS INTIMATED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, ACC ORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, IF AT ALL THERE WAS ANY ADDITION, IT HAS T O BE MADE ONLY IN THE HANDS OF RLT ACADEMY AND SHANTHINIKETHAN SCHOOL AND DEFINITELY NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THERE FORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS T HE CIT(APPEALS) 3 I.T.A. NO.180/CHNY/18 ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION OF 81,22,906/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE CLA IM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE PAN NUMBER OF THE ASSESSEE WAS WR ONGLY CONNECTED WITH SCHOOL ACCOUNT WAS EXAMINED BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER. IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE CLAIM, ACCORDING T O THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSING OFFICER VERIFIED THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE SCHOOL. THE SCHOOL / TRUST FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME AFTER THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD UNDER SECTION 139(4) OF THE ACT. IN OTHER WORDS, A CCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE TRUST / SCHOOL BELATEDLY FILED THE RE TURNS. THE TRUST / SCHOOL HAS NOT FILED ANY RETURN IN THE LAST THREE Y EARS. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT E STABLISH WHETHER THE DEPOSIT OF 81,22,906/- WAS ACCOUNTED BY THE SCHOOL IN THEIR RETURN. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL EVIDENCE, A CCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION W HICH WAS RIGHTLY CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE RIGHT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS THAT THE DEPOSITS 4 I.T.A. NO.180/CHNY/18 WERE MADE IN THE SCHOOL ACCOUNT. FROM THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT APPEARS THAT THE BANK IS COLLECTING FEES FROM STUDENTS DIRECTLY. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT THE PAN NUMBER OF THE ASSESSEE WAS WRONGLY CONNECTED WITH THE SCHOOL ACCO UNT AND THE FEES WERE CREDITED ONLY IN THE BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAI NED BY THE SCHOOL AND NOT IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS F ACTUAL ASPECT NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED WHETHER THE CASH CREDIT WAS MA DE IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE OR IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE SC HOOL. IT ALSO NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED IF THE AMOUNT WAS CREDITED IN THE ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE TRUST OR SCHOOL WHICH IS AN INDEP ENDENT ASSESSABLE UNIT AND WHETHER THE ADDITION CAN BE MAD E UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT IN THE HANDS OF THE PRESENT A SSESSEE. MERELY BECAUSE THE PARTICULAR ASSESSEE, NAMELY, SCHOOL OR TRUST HAS NOT FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME OR FILED BELATEDLY THE R ETURNS, THAT CANNOT BE A REASON TO ASSESS THE DEPOSIT IN THE HANDS OF T HE ASSESSEE. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE INCOME HAS TO BE ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE RIGHT PERSON. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE RE- EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS 5 I.T.A. NO.180/CHNY/18 REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL THAT MAY BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FIND OUT WHETHER T HE CREDIT WAS FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE SCHOOL OR IN THE B ANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 14 TH JUNE, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! .#$#% ) ( . . . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 7 /DATED, THE 14 TH JUNE, 2018. KRI. 0 .389 :9*3 /COPY TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT 2. ./,- /RESPONDENT 3. 2 ;3 () /CIT(A)-3, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-5, CHENNAI 5. 9< .3 /DR 6. =% > /GF.