Shri S.Krishna Kumar, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 193/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4613 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 02-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 04-02-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S DASGUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH : CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 193/MDS/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 SHRI S. KRISHNA KUMAR, NO.6, EAST SPURTANK ROAD, CHETPET, CHENNAI 600 031. [PAN: AFDPK 4054 N] VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD XV(4), CHENNAI -600 034. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. DAS GUPTA, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 02-09-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-09-2013 O R D E R PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-XI I, CHENNAI, DATED 19-12-2012 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (A Y)-2009-10. I.T.A. NO. 193/MDS/2013 :- 2 -: 2. THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN GA RMENTS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF SANDHYA EXPORTS. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY. 2009-10 ON 3 0-09-2009 DECLARING ITS TOTAL INCOME AS ` 2,70,250/-. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE U/S. 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSES SMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED CASH DE POSITS TO THE TUNE OF ` 29,60,430/-. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN. S INCE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH VALID EXPLANATION, T HE CASH DEPOSITS WERE TREATED AS UN-EXPLAINED CASH CREDITS U/S. 68 OF THE ACT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 23-12 -2011, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APP EALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE SU BMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND EXAMINING THE ASSESSMENT O RDERS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS ON RECORD, DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS), TH E ASSESSEE HAS COME IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL. THE I.T.A. NO. 193/MDS/2013 :- 3 -: ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN APPEAL IS THE AMOUNT OF ` 29,60,430/- DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT ON VARIOUS DATES BEING TR EATED AS UN- EXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. 3. SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS EXPORTING GARMENTS TO SRI LANKA. WHENEVER THE ASSESSEE FACED FINANCIAL C RUNCH FOR MAKING PAYMENTS TO THE SUPPLIERS OF THE GARMENT, TH E AGENTS OF SRI LANKA BUYERS WOULD EXTEND CASH LOAN TO THE ASSE SSEE FOR MAKING PAYMENTS TO THE SUPPLIERS. SUBSEQUENTLY, TH E ENTIRE AMOUNT WAS RE-PAID TO THE AGENTS DURING THE FINANCI AL YEAR ITSELF AFTER RECEIVING REMITTANCES FROM SRI LANKAN BUYERS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS PLACED ON RECORD COMPLETE BANK STATEMENTS OF KOTAK MAHINDR A BANK AND INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER A S WELL AS CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI S. DAS GUPTA, REPRESENTI NG THE DEPARTMENT SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MISERABL Y FAILED TO I.T.A. NO. 193/MDS/2013 :- 4 -: SUBSTANTIATE HIS VERSION OF FACTS. THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT PLACED ON RECORD EITHER BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR THE C IT(APPEALS) ANY DOCUMENT TO SHOW THAT THE CASH LOAN HAS BEEN GI VEN BY THE AGENTS OF THE SRI LANKA BUYERS. THE LD. DR FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN TAKING DIFFERENT STAND BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(APPEALS). THE ASSESS EE HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASS ESSEE USED KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK FOR MAKING PAYMENTS TO THE SUPP LIERS. TO ENSURE THE CLEARANCE OF CHEQUES, THE AMOUNT WAS WIT HDRAWN FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK AND DEPOSITED IN KOTAK MAHINDR A BANK. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS EXAMINED BOTH THE STATEME NTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAS CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MA DE CASH DEPOSITS IN KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK ACCOUNT MUCH BEFORE THE DATE OF WITHDRAWALS FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK ACCOUNT. THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BE LOW AND PRAYED FOR THE DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF T HE DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. A I.T.A. NO. 193/MDS/2013 :- 5 -: PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE ASSE SSING OFFICER HAS EXAMINED STATEMENTS OF BOTH THE BANK ACCOUNTS I .E., KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK AND INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK. AFTER MAKI NG CLOSE SCRUTINY OF THE BANK STATEMENTS, THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN MAKING CASH DEPOSITS IN KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK MUCH BEFORE THE DAT E OF WITHDRAWALS MADE FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK. THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE SUBSTANTIAL WITHDRAWALS FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK A CCOUNT FROM 10-01-2009 ONWARDS. TILL THAT TIME, THE WITHDRAWAL FROM THE INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK WERE ONLY TO THE TUNE OF ` 1,62,500/-. WHEREAS THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE KOTAK MAHINDRA BAN K AS ON 06-01-2009 WERE TO THE TUNE OF ` 31,22,930/-. IN APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE H AS NARRATED A DIFFERENT STORY. THE STAND OF ASSESSEE BEFORE CI T(APPEALS) WAS, THE AMOUNTS IN KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK WERE DEPOSI TED BY THE AGENTS OF THE SRI LANKAN BUYERS OF THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO HELP THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE PAYMENTS TO THE SUPPLIERS. I.T.A. NO. 193/MDS/2013 :- 6 -: 6. WE FIND THAT INCONSISTENT VERSIONS WERE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TWO AUTHORITIES BELOW IN EXPLAI NING THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. EXCEPT FROM THE BALD STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE, NO DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD TO SUBSTANTIATE THE REASONS FOR CASH DEPOSITS IN THE B ANK ACCOUNT. EVEN BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, THE SUBMISSIONS MADE WERE NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY COGENT EVIDENCE. WE DO NOT FIND A NY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 11 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (VIKAS AWASTHY) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013 TNMM COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR