Academy Utkarsh, Kanpur V. Income Tax Officer(Exemptions), Kanpur

ITA 199/LKW/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7327 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRADEEP MEHROTRA S HRI JAI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.199/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH SMC, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.199/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 M/S ACCADEMY UTKARSH, 112/321, SWAROOP NAGAR, KANPUR. PAN:AAATA9088J VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-I, KANPUR DATED 02/01/2018 PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WERE FURNISHE D BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR DURING THE APPELLATE PROCE EDINGS IN SUPPORT OF THE FACTS. 2. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND I N LAW IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT NO EVIDENC E WAS FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN SUPPORT O F THE FACTS STATED IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE C IT(A). 3. THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ARBITRARY, ILLEG AL, BAD IN LAW, LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. 2. LEARNED A. R., AT THE OUTSET, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY AND DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE AMOUNTS OF APPELLANT BY SHRI PRADEEP MEHROTRA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY S HRI JAI NATH VERMA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING 23/10/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04/11/2019 I.T.A. NO.199/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 2 RS.14,32,800/- AND RS.10,22,432/- WERE CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BUT WERE NOT SHOWN IN THE INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION OF THESE TWO AM OUNTS. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS EXPLAINED TO THE ASSE SSING OFFICER THAT THESE AMOUNTS WERE ACCOUNTED FOR IN EARLIER YEAR WHEREAS THE SAME WERE CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION AND IN THIS RESPECT BANK RECONCILIATION WAS ALSO FILED BEFORE THE ASSES SING OFFICER. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THESE SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE BEFORE T HE LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO BUT HE ALSO DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WERE FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. LEARNED A. R. IN THIS RESPECT TOOK US TO PAPER BOOK PAGES 3 AND 4 WHERE A COPY OF LETTER WRITTEN TO ASSESSING OFFICER WAS PLA CED AND WHEREIN THIS FACT OF HAVING ACCOUNTED FOR THESE AMOUNTS IN THE EARLIE R YEAR WAS MENTIONED. LEARNED A. R. ALSO TOOK US TO PAGE 4A OF THE PAPER BOOK WHERE THE BANK RECONCILIATION STATEMENT, SUBMITTED TO ASSESSING OF FICER, WAS PLACED AND I WAS ALSO TAKEN TO PAGE 4B OF THE PAPER BOOK WHERE T HE COPY OF DEMAND DRAFT OF THESE TWO AMOUNTS WERE PLACED. THEREFORE, IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LEARNED CIT(A ) THAT NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WERE FURNISHED, ARE WRONG. 3. LEARNED D. R., ON THE OTHER HAND, HEAVILY PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE THR OUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. I FIND THAT THE ONLY DISPUTE IN THIS CASE IS REGARDING THE AMOUNTS OF RS.14,32,800/- AND RS.10,22,432/- , WHIC H THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD FOUND TO BE CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT. THE PAPER BOOK PAGES, REFERRED TO BY LEARNED A. R., EXPLAIN THAT THESE TW O RECEIPTS RELATED TO EARLIER YEAR AND WHICH SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER I.T.A. NO.199/LKW/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 3 AND LEARNED CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE WRONGLY HELD THAT NO EVIDENCE WAS PROVIDED. THEREFORE, I DEEM IT APP ROPRIATE TO REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WI TH A DIRECTION TO READJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER TAKING INTO ACC OUNT THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THESE RECEIPTS WERE REFLECTED IN THE INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT IN THE EARLIER YEARS. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FILE COMPLETE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTI ON. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE WILL BE PROVIDED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04/11 /2019) SD/. ( T. S. KAPOOR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:04/11/2019 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW