Satpal Singh Gambhir HUF, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1985/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 198520114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 09-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: SURJEET SINGH; M P SINGH ARS
• Keywords: Initiation of penalty proceedings; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 68; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI G BENC H BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JM & SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, AM ITA NO.1985/D/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2002-03 SATPAL SINGH GAMBHIR HUF H.NO.2, ROAD NO.51, PUNJABI BAGH, NEW DELHI V/S INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 25 (3),VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI [PAN :AAAHS3509Q] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY S/SHRI SURJEET SINGH & M.P. SINGH, ARS REVENUE BY SMT.S. MOHANTY, DR DATE OF HEARING 09-12-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16-12-2011 O R D E R A.N.PAHUJA:- THIS APPEAL FILED ON 21.04.2011 BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST AN ORDER DATED 17.02.2011 OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-XXIV, NEW DE LHI, RAISES THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS WRONG, ILLEGAL AND AGAINST T HE PROVISIONS OR THE LAW WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASI DE. 2 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LE ARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED TO THE CONFIRM THE ADDITION MADE O F ` `1,41,458/- ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED S OURCE AND ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 3 FURTHER IT IS UNJUSTIFIED TO INITIATE THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(B) AND 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT AS IT IS UNJUSTIFIED AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD ALTER OR AMEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. I.T.A. NO.1985/DEL./2011 2 2. ADVERTING FIRST TO GROUND NO.2 IN THE APPEAL, FACTS IN BRIEF AS PER RELEVANT ORDERS ARE THAT ON RECEIPT OF INFORMATION FROM DIT(INV.)-I, NEW DELHI REGARDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY RECEIVED BY THE ASSES SEE FROM M/S MKM FINSEC (P) LTD. FOR AN AMOUNT OF ` ` 90,000/-, THE ASSESSING OFFICER (A.O. IN SHORT) ISS UED A NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREI NAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE REPLIED VIDE LETTER DATED 7 TH MAY, 2007 THAT THE RETURN HAS ALREADY BEEN FILED ON 9.9.2002, DURING THE CO URSE OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT WITH ICICI BANK. ON PERUSAL OF THE SAID ACCOUNT , IT WAS REVE ALED THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THREE ENTRIES FROM MKM FINSEC (P) LTD., WH ILE DECLARING INTEREST INCOME OF ONLY ` `4038/- FROM THE SAID COMPANY. TO A FURTHER QUERY BY THE AO, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS NOR ANY APP LICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED AND NOR EVEN ANY WRITTEN REPLY OR DETAILS . SINCE THE BANK ACCOUNT REVEALED ENTRIES OF ` 1,45,496/- WHILE THE ASSESSEE DECLARED ONLY AN AMOU NT OF ` `4038/- IN THE RETURN, THE AO ADDED THE DIFFERENCE OF ` ` 1,41,458/- BY WAY OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 3. ON APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THEY HAD EARLIER ADVANCED A SUM OF ` ` 1,40,000/- ON 30.12.1999 VIDE CHEQUE NO.428688 TO M /S MKM FINSEC (P) LTD. AND SINCE THE AMOUNT WAS REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.3.2001, THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITION. HOWEVER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT INDICATE THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH AN AMOUNT OF ` `1,40,000/- WAS ADVANCED, THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE ADDITION. 4. THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE AFORESAID FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A).AT THE OUTSET, LEARNED AR ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE MATTER REQUIRES RECONSIDERATION BY THE AO, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAVING NOT CONSIDERED THE ISSUE IN PROPER PERSPECTI VE. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED DR DID NOT OPPOSE THESE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AR. I.T.A. NO.1985/DEL./2011 3 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THOUGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE. INDISPUTABLY, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH AN Y EXPLANATION BEFORE THE AO REGARDING THE AFORESAID THREE ENTRIES OF ` `1,45,496/- RECEIVED FROM M/S MKM FINSEC (P) LTD. WHILE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ,THE AS SESSEE CONTENDED THAT THEY HAD ADVANCED ` `1,40,000/- TO THE AFORESAID COMPANY ON 30.12.1999. SINCE THE PURPOSE OF THE SAID ADVANCE OR ITS NEXUS WITH THE A FORESAID THREE ENTRIES OR EVEN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN THE AFORESAID BANK ACCOUNT AND FURTHER DETAILS AND NATURE OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OF ` 90,000/- ARE NOT AVAILABLE BEFORE US, WE CONSIDER IT FAIR AND APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRE SH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER ALLOWING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. N EEDLESS TO SAY THAT WHILE REDECIDING THE ISSUES, THE AO SHALL PASS A SPEAKING ORDER, BRINGING OUT CLEARLY THE FACTS RELATING TO ACCOMMODATION ENTRY. THE ASS ESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO CO- OPERATE IN THE ASSESSMENT AND PLACE ALL THE RELEVA NT FACTS WITHIN THEIR SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE ALONG WITH OTHER RELEVANT DETAILS BEFOR E THE AO .WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, GROUND NO. 2 IN THE APPEAL IS DISP OSED OF. 6. GROUND NO.1 IN THE APPEAL BEING GENERAL IN NATU RE NOR ANY SUBMISSIONS HAVING BEEN MADE BEFORE US ON THIS GROU ND, DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SEPARATE ADJUDICATION WHILE GROUND NO.3 RELATES TO INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(B) AND 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT AND MERE INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE ACT BEING NOT APPEALABLE AS A LSO NO ADDITIONAL GROUND HAVING BEEN RAISED BEFORE US IN TERMS OF RESIDUARY GROUND NO.4 IN THE APPEAL, ACCORDINGLY, ALL THESE GROUNDS ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN RESULT, APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED BUT FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV ) (A.N. PAHUJ A) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NS I.T.A. NO.1985/DEL./2011 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. SATPAL SINGH GAMBHIR HUF, H.NO.51, PUNJABI BAGH, NEW DELHI 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 25 (3), NEW DELHI. 3. CIT (APPEALS)-XXIV, NEW DELHI. 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR, ITAT,G BENCH, NEW DELHI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI