Smt. Rupa Maheshkumar Gandhi, Ahmedabad V. The ITO, Ward-5(3)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 1931/AHD/2019

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Rupa Mahesh Gandhi, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad, which upheld the Assessing Officer's decision. The Assessing Officer had added Rs.28,66,525 to the assessee's income, treating it as unexplained investment and expenses related to her activities in the Bombay Stock Exchange and credit card payments. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had overlooked the detailed submissions made by the assessee, which included the ledger account of the broker and details of scripwise profit and loss, as well as a denial of any credit card payments. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299912 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 20-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 30-12-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MRS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1931/Ahd/2019 िनधा रणवष /Assessment Year: 2011-12 Smt. Rupa Mahesh Gandhi, D-404, Dharnidhar Tower, Opp. Dharnidhar Derasar, Paldi, Ahmedabad PAN: ABUPG 5905 D Vs. The Income Tax Officer, War-5(3)(2), Ahmedabad / (Appellant) / (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.D. Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri B.P. Makwana, Sr. DR सुनव ई क त र ख/Date of Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोषण क त र ख /Date of Pronouncement: 29.03.2023 आदेश/O R D E R The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short] dated 24.10.2019 passed under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. 2. The brief background of the case is that the assessee’s case was reopened for scrutiny for the reason that the AO had information that she had invested in Bombay Stock Exchange amounting to Rs.25,21,525/- and made credit card payment of Rs.3,45,000/- in her bank account with City Bank Ltd. in the impugned year under consideration. The assessee was served with a notice under Section 148 of the Act; in response to which she filed return of income of Rs.2,54,067/-. Thereafter, in response to the notices issued to her to explain the source of investment in Bombay Stock Exchange and the source of payment of credit card, the assessee filed due reply submitting that she had nothing to do with the same and it was her husband who was looking into the entire matter and an affidavit of her (SMC) ITA No. 1931/Ahd/2019 Smt. Rupa Maheshkumar Gandhi Vs ITO AY 2011-12 2 husband was also filed in this regard. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, noting that no details explaining the source of investment had been submitted by the assessee, made addition of the investment of the assessee in Bombay Stock Exchange and the credit card payment treating the same as unexplained investment and expenses of the assessee, resulting in an addition of Rs.28,66,525/- (investment in BSE Rs.25,21,525/- + credit card payment Rs.3,45,000/-) to the income of the assessee. 3. The matter was carried in appeal before the learned CIT(A) who upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal before us raising following grounds:- “1. That the reassessment proceedings and assessment order passed by the Ld. AO is bad in law, in particular the non issue of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and therefore, the order passed by the ld. AO is without jurisdiction and had in law and therefore the order passed by the ld. AO is required to be quashed and addition made therein should be deleted in full. 2. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition of undisclosed investment and expenditure of Rs.28,66,525/- (investment in BSE Rs.25,21,525/- and Rs.3,45,000/- of credit card payment) and therefore the learned AO is to be directed to delete the said addition while computing the total income.” 4. Ground of appeal No.1 was not pressed by the learned Counsel for the assessee before us and the same is, therefore, dismissed as not pressed. 5. Vis-à-vis Ground No.2 raised on merits of the case, the solitary contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee was that both the authorities below had ignored the submissions filed by the assessee explaining the source of investment and expenses and had given incorrect finding that no details had been submitted by the assessee. In this regard, he drew our attention to the acknowledgement of the e-submission made (SMC) ITA No. 1931/Ahd/2019 Smt. Rupa Maheshkumar Gandhi Vs ITO AY 2011-12 3 before the Assessing Officer on 11.12.2018 submitting the ledger account of the broker through whom investment was made and the details of scripwise profit and loss incurred by the assessee along with written submissions made. The acknowledgement of the submission with No. 11121810963855 was placed before us at page no. 4 of the paper-book. Paper-book page Nos. 5-10 was the enclosures, including the submission made by the assessee and the statement of the broker and scripwise details of profit and loss. Drawing our attention to the submission made before the Assessing Officer placed at page no.5 of the paper-book, it was pointed out that with respect to the credit card payment the assessee had denied making any such payment and had asked the Assessing Officer to provide the details of the same. It was also pointed out from the letter that the ledger account of the broker was submitted for the transactions in shares made during the year and it was also mentioned that the savings account of the assessee in Bhuj Mercantile Co-Op. Bank Limited with Savings Account No.81936 was used for the purpose. It was also pointed out from the submission that the assessee had mentioned that it had incurred loss of Rs.3,13,613/- in the scripts traded during the year and the details of the same was also submitted. Learned Counsel for the assessee contended that despite of the above explanation and details submitted by the assessee with regard to the investment, scripwise details and credit card expenses made, both the authorities below had held that no details were submitted by the assessee while treating the investments and the expenses as unexplained. He, therefore, pleaded that the matter be restored back to the Assessing Officer for considering the reply of the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative, however, relied on the orders of the authorities below. 6. I have heard both the parties. As transpires from the orders of the authorities below, the addition to the income of the assessee on account of (SMC) ITA No. 1931/Ahd/2019 Smt. Rupa Maheshkumar Gandhi Vs ITO AY 2011-12 4 unexplained investment in Bombay Stock Exchange of Rs.25,21,525/- and unexplained source of payment of credit card amounting to Rs.3,45,000/- was made in the absence of any details submitted by the assessee before the authorities. However, before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee has demonstrated that due details were filed with regard to both the issues. As noted above, the assessee had filed submissions explaining that no investment had been made in scripts but on the contrary the assessee had traded in scripts and incurred losses during the year; ledger account of the broker reflecting the said fact as also detailed scripwise withdrawal was also filed. Similarly, with respect to expense incurred on credit card payment, the assessee had denied making any such payment. Therefore, clearly, the orders passed by the authorities below had ignored the submissions of the assessee. In the interest of justice, therefore, the issue needs reconsideration and, therefore, the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer to be decided afresh after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and considering all the contentions and explanation in this regard. 7. Ground of appeal No.2 raised by the assessee is thus allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In effect, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 29 th March, 2023 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 29/03/2023 **bt (SMC) ITA No. 1931/Ahd/2019 Smt. Rupa Maheshkumar Gandhi Vs ITO AY 2011-12 5 आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश क琉 क琉क琉 क琉 灹ितिलिप 灹ितिलिप灹ितिलिप 灹ितिलिप अ灡ेिषत अ灡ेिषतअ灡ेिषत अ灡ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ牸 अपीलाथ牸अपीलाथ牸 अपीलाथ牸 / The Appellant 2. 灹瀄यथ牸 灹瀄यथ牸灹瀄यथ牸 灹瀄यथ牸 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत संबंिधतसंबंिधत संबंिधत आयकर आयकरआयकर आयकर आयु猴 आयु猴आयु猴 आयु猴 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयकरआयकर आयकर आयु猴 आयु猴आयु猴 आयु猴)अपील अपीलअपील अपील (/ The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय िवभागीयिवभागीय िवभागीय 灹ितिनिध 灹ितिनिध灹ितिनिध 灹ितिनिध ,आयकर आयकरआयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीयअपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरणअिधकरण अिधकरण/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad, 6. गाड榁 गाड榁गाड榁 गाड榁 फाईल फाईलफाईल फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसारआदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY सहायक सहायकसहायक सहायक पंजीकार पंजीकारपंजीकार पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर आयकरआयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीयअपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरणअिधकरण अिधकरण ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation ...23.03.2023... 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member :..... 23.03.2023 .......... 3. Other Member........................ 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S...27.03.2023....................... 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement......29.03.2023. 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S...29.03.2023................ 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk......30.03.2023.......... 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order............ 10. Date of Despatch of the Order..................