NURUDDIN B AJANI, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 20, MUMBAI

ITA 1983/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0761 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR YOGESH KAMAT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1983/M/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SHRI NURUDDIN B. AJANI, 11-A, ALIABAD AGA HALL, NESBIT ROAD, MAZGAON, MUMBAI 400 010 PAN: AACPA 0161A VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -20, MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAKESH JOSHI, A.R. REVENUE BY : DR. YOGESH KAMAT, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 02.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.07.2015 O R D E R PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSES SEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.01.2013 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2009-10. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WE LL AS IN LAW, THE LEARNED CT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS.8,3 0,780/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED NEGATIVE PEAK CASH BALANCE, WITH OUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. ON THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WEL L AS IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT HAD RECEIVED THE SAID SUM IN INHERITANCE FROM HIS D ECEASED PARENTS, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS EL CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE. 3. ON THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WEL L AS IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE SAID CASH BALANCE WAS ITA NO.1983/M/2013 SHRI NURUDDIN B. AJANI 2 CONSIDERED IN THE HAND OF APPELLANT, IN WEALTH TAX ASSESSMENTS FOR VARIOUS YEARS. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER OR DELETE THE SAID GROUND OF APPEAL. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS T HE AO) OBSERVED THAT CASH DEPOSITS AGGREGATING TO RS.8,57,000/- WERE FOUND HA VING BEEN DEPOSITED OVER THE PERIOD FROM 27.06.08 TO 26.03.09. THE AO NOTED THAT AT THE SAME TIME THE CASH BOOK OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWED NEGATIVE CASH BALA NCE. HE THEREFORE INFERRED THAT CASH DEPOSITS WERE FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. ON BEING ASKED TO EXPLAIN IN THIS RESPECT BY THE AO, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.10 LAKH WAS BEQUEATHED BY HIS DECEASED PARENTS IN CASH AND THE SAID ENTRY HAD REMAINED TO BE PASSED IN THE BOOKS WHICH IN TURN LE AD TO THE NEGATIVE CASH BALANCE. THE AO DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH T HE DETAILS IN THIS RESPECT E.G. COPY OF THE WILL OF THE FATHER AND MOTHER OF THE AS SESSEE, A COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE, COPIES OF TH E RETURNS OF INCOME OF THE DECEASED PARENTS OF THE ASSESSEE, SOURCE OF CASH IN THE HANDS OF DECEASED PARENTS AND THEIR WEALTH TAX RETURNS ETC. THE ASSE SSEE FURNISHED CERTAIN DETAILS. AFTER EXAMINATION OF THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSETS TRANSFERRED BY WILL HAVE NOT BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEARS. THE SOURCE OF CASH IN THE HAND OF THE DECEASED PARENTS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT EXPLAINED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE AO HELD THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS WERE NOT SATISFACTOR ILY EXPLAINED. HE THEREFORE ADDED TO THE RETURN OF THE INCOME THE NEGATIVE PEAK CASH BALANCE OF RS.8,30,780/-. 4. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED CE RTAIN DETAILS SUCH AS BANK STATEMENTS ETC. TO SHOW THAT THE AMOUNT WAS IN FACT WITHDRAWN ON DIFFERENT DATES FROM THE JOINT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSES SEE WITH HIS FATHER AND THE ITA NO.1983/M/2013 SHRI NURUDDIN B. AJANI 3 SAME WAS SUBSEQUENTLY DEPOSITED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF ASSESSEE ON DIFFERENT DATES. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE DATES OF W ITHDRAWAL FROM THE JOINT ACCOUNT AND THE DEPOSIT DATE OF DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS IN THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE WERE DIFFERENT, HENCE IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE SO URCE OF CASH DEPOSIT WAS THE BEQUEATHED AMOUNT FROM THE DECEASED PARENTS. HE TH EREFORE UPHELD THE ADDITIONS. 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBM ITTED THAT THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION WAS BEQUEATHED BY HIS DECEASED PARENTS. H E HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE COPY OF THE WILL PLACED AT PAGE 1 TO 3 OF TH E PAPER BOOK. HE, WHILE RELYING UPON THE STATEMENTS OF HIS FATHER NAMELY LA TE SHRI BADRUDDIN HUSSEIN AJANI, HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL CASH AVAILABLE WITH HIS FATHER WAS OF RS.84,36,560/- WHICH WAS SHOWN TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANKS ON DIFFERENT DATES. HE HAS FURTHER INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE WEALTH TAX RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2007-08 WHEREIN THE AO HAS ACCEPT ED THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT CASH OF RS.10 LAKH WAS RECEIVED BY TH E ASSESSEE FROM HIS DECEASED PARENTS AS PER THE WILL THOUGH THE SAME HA S BEEN ACCEPTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE DEPARTMENTS STAND IN THE INCOME T AX PROCEEDINGS. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, WE FIN D THAT THE ASSESSEE ON THE RECORD HAS PRODUCED THE BANK STATEMENTS WHICH SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEES FATHER WAS HAVING SUFFICIENT CASH BALANCE IN HIS ACCOUNTS. IT IS ALSO NOT DISPUTED THAT THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEQUEATHED HIS MOVAB LE AND IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. MERELY BECAU SE, THE DATE OF WITHDRAWALS FROM THE ACCOUNT OF FATHER AND THE DATE OF DEPOSITS OF THE AMOUNT IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE DIFFER THAT ITSELF IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO EXPLANATION REGARDING THE SOURCE OF CASH IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. CONSIDERING THE OVERALL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE DO NOT THINK IT A CASE OF NO EXPLANATION OF SOURCE OF DEPOSITS IN T HE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ITA NO.1983/M/2013 SHRI NURUDDIN B. AJANI 4 ASSESSEE. THE ADDITIONS, THUS, IN OUR VIEW, ARE NO T WARRANTED IN THIS CASE AND THE SAME ARE ACCORDINGLY ORDERED TO BE DELETED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS HER EBY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10.07.2015. SD/- SD/- (G.S. PANNU) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 10.07.2015. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.