Anup Kumar Agarwal, New Delhi V. ITO, Ward - 34(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1814/KOL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9185 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 22-09-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S BHA DRA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Bonafide mistake; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : KOLKATA [ () , , , . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , ,, , '# ] ]] ] [BEFORE HONBLE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & HONBLE S RI C. D. RAO, AM] % / I.T.A NO. 1814/KOL/2010 &' ()/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 ANUP KUMAR AGARWAL -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER/WARD-34(2) DELHI. KOLKATA [PAN : AD APA 9031 E] [ +, /APPELLANT ] [ -.+,/ RESPONDENT ] +, / FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI P.K. SINGH -.+, / FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI S. BHADRA '/ /ORDER . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , ,, , '# PER C. D. RAO, A. M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-XX, KOLKATA DATED 23.07.2010, PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 06-07. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS AP PEAL REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.12,47,032/-. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE ISSUE ARE THAT ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS.12,47,032/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT BY OBSERVING THAT DURING TH E COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED CASH OF R S.12,47,032/- DURING THE YEAR IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT NO. 095104000028334 WITH IDBI BANK, CHANDNI CHOWK, DELHI. IT WAS ARGUED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IS DISCLOSED IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEES HUF, WHICH IS ASSESSED WITH PAN AAJHA3257L. ASSESSI NG OFFICER CONDUCTED ENQUIRIES FROM IDBI BANK. ASSESSING OFFICER WAS INFORMED THAT BAN K ACCOUNT WAS IN THE NAME OF ANUP KUMAR AGARWAL, INDIVIDUAL. THE PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER G IVEN TO THE BANK WAS ADAPA 9031 E, ITA NO. 1814/KOL/20 10 2 WHICH BELONGS TO ANUP KUMAR AGARWAL, INDIVIDUAL. IN THIS FACTUAL BACKGROUND, ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.12,47,032/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. 4. ON APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE SAME BY OBSERVING THAT LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBM ISSIONS ALREADY MADE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT ACTUAL LY BELONGS TO ASSESSEES HUF, AND, THAT THE CASH DEPOSIT IS EXPLAINED IN THE CASE OF THE HUF. I FIND NO MERIT IN THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE IDBI BANK HAS CATEGORICALLY INFORMED THE ASSESS ING OFFICER THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT IS IN THE NAME OF ANUP AGARWAL, INDIVIDUAL AND, THAT THE PAN GIVEN TO BANK ALSO BELONGS TO ASSESSEE INDIVIDUAL. LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ADMITTED BEFORE ME THAT NO RETURN OF HUF FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 WAS FILED. IN THIS FACTUAL BACKGROUND, THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THIS NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. LD. COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND FURTHER FILED PAPER BOOK CONTAINING LETTER WRITTEN BY ASSESSEE TO ASSESSING OFFICER ON 21.10.2008 AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF FILING OF INCOME-TAX RETURN BY ANUP KUMAR AGARWAL. BY REFERRING THESE TWO DOCUMENTS, HE ARGUED THAT THOUGH ASSESSEE HAS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED THAT BANK ACCOUNTS BELONGING TO ASSESSEE IN THE STATUS OF HUF AND THE SAME HAS BEEN SHOWN IN HUFS ACCOUNTS FILED BEFORE WARD-21(1), NEW DELHI. REVENUE AUTHORITIES MADE THESE ADDITIONS WITHOUT VERIFYING THE FACT. THEREFORE, HE REQUESTED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND DELETE TH E ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUBSEQUENTLY, CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ON CAREF UL PERUSAL OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE IN HIS LETTER DATED 21.10.2008 FILED BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER, HAS MADE THE FOLLOWING SUBMISSIONS :- AS PER INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM YOU WHICH WAS STA TED TO HAVE BEEN ITA NO. 1814/KOL/20 10 3 FORWARDED TO YOU ON THE BASIS OF A/R, NOW I REALIZE THAT BY INADVERTENCE AND BONAFIDE MISTAKE, MY INDIVIDUAL PAN WAS GIVEN TO TH E SAID BANK ALTHOUGH THE ACCOUNT BELONGS TO AND WAS OPENED FOR MY HUF, ANUP KUMAR AGARWAL (HUF). THE MISTAKE IS DEEPLY REGRETTED AND I PAY FOR WAIVE R OF PENALTY FOR QUOTING OF WRONG PAN WHICH WAS UNINTENTIONAL. HOWEVER, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE TRANSACTIONS OF THE ABOVE REFERRED BANK ACCOUNT BELONG TO MY HUF AND ON THE BASIS OF PLACE OF BUSINESS BEING IN DELHI, THE SAID HUF IS ASSESSABLE WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF WARD 21(1), NEW DELHI AS WOULD BE EVIDENCED BY A PHOTO COPY OF MY LATEST ITR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IN RESPECT OF MY SAID HUF E NCLOSED THERETO AND THEREFORE, VERIFICATION OF TRANSACTIONS OF THE SAID HUF, IF NEEDED MAY BE DONE BY REFERRING THE MATTER TO THE PRESENT JURISDICTIONAL OFFICER OF MY HUF.' HOWEVER, BOTH ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS BASED ON THE BANK INFORMATION ONLY WITHOUT VERIFYING THE ABOVE CONTEN TIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WHETHER THE BANK ACCOUNT HAS BEEN DISCLOSED IN THE STATUS OF HUF BEF ORE WARD-21(1), NEW DELHI. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ON THIS ISSUE FOR LIMITED PURPOSES TO VERIFY WHETHER THE TRANSACTIONS RECORDED IN THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT OR A CTUALLY DISCLOSED BY ASSESSEE IN HUF STATUS AGAINST PAN NO.AAJHA3257L. IF IT IS FOUND THAT THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT HAS BEEN REFLECTED IN THE HUF ACCOUNT, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, NO ADDITION IS TO BE MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT IN THE INDIVIDUAL STATUS OF THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDI NGLY. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. '/ 0 1& 2 3 ORDER PRONOUNC ED IN THE COURT ON 31. 03. 2011. SD/- SD/- [ , ] [ . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , ,, , '# ] [ MAHAVIR SINGH ] [ C. D. RAO ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (!#) DATED : 31 ST MARCH, 2011. ITA NO. 1814/KOL/20 10 4 '/ 4 -5 6'5(/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT- ANUP KUMAR AGARWAL, E-33, SECTOR-7, R OHINI, DELHI-110085. 2 -.+, / RESPONDENT : INCOME TAX OFFICER/WARD-34(2), PODDA R COURT, 18, RABINDRA SARANI, KOLKATA-700 001. 3. /&/ THE CIT, 4. /& ()/ THE CIT(A), KOLKATA. 5. <2 -&/ DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA [.5 -/ TRUE COPY] '/&1 / BY ORDER, > /DEPUTY/ASSTT REGISTRAR. [KKC ?@ &A> B /SR.PS]