Sh Sudhir Kumar Sood (HUF), Gwalior V. ITO W 3(1), Gwalior

ITA 202/AGR/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sudhir Kumar Sood (HUF) against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which confirmed the AO's addition of Rs. 8,05,318 as undisclosed investments in mutual funds and fixed deposits for the assessment year 2012-13. The AO had initially added these amounts due to the absence of necessary documentation to substantiate the source of the investments. The assessee argued that the investments were made by switching funds and encashing old deposits, which were supported by bank statements and previous acceptances by the AO. The Tribunal, after reviewing the evidence, agreed with the assessee and allowed the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 113597 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 12-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 25-12-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ : AGRA) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.202/AGR/2022 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) Sudhir Kumar Sood (HUF), vs. ITO, Ward 3 (1), 44, Gandhi Nagar Pandav, Gwalior. Gwalior – 474 002 (Madhya Pradesh). (PAN : AAPHS1859C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Pankaj Gargh, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13.09.2023 Date of Order : 20.09.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 28.10.2022 pertaining to assessment year 2012-13. 2. Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee read as under :- “1. Because the learned CIT (Appeal) has wrongly and arbitrarily confirmed the addition of Rs.8,05,318/- made by the Assessing Officer for so called undisclosed investment as under:- ITA No.202/AGR/2022 2 Undisclosed investment in mutual fund Rs.3,05,318/- Undisclosed investment in Fixed Deposit Rs.5,00,000/- 2. Because the source of investment of Rs.8,05,318/- is fully proved with supporting documents. The learned CIT (Appeal) has factually erred in confirming the addition made by the AO. 3. Because under the facts and circumstances of the case the addition of Rs.8,05,318/- made by the AO and confirmed by the learned CIT (A) deserves to be deleted.” 3. In this case, in the assessment order, AO made addition on account of unexplained mutual fund amounting to Rs.3,05,318/- and another addition on account of unexplained fixed deposit of Rs.5,00,000/-. The reasoning given by the AO was that for the investment in mutual fund, necessary DMAT account statement was not submitted. Furthermore, the FD amount was added on the ground that the assessee has not produced necessary evidence. 4. Against this order, assessee appealed before the ld. CIT (A) who confirmed the AO’s order. 5. Against this order, assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that as regards investment of Rs.3,05,318/- in mutual fund, the same was made after switching over from another mutual fund account. In this regard, he referred statements filed at pages 1 to 5 of the paper book. He further submitted that an ITA No.202/AGR/2022 3 investment of Rs.3,00,000/- was made in mutual fund on 07.06.2011 which has been accepted by the AO. Thus, there was no fresh investment of Rs.3,05,318/- in mutual fund. He further submitted that investment of Rs.5,00,000/- was made after getting the old FDR encashed on 14.10.2011. To support this, assessee submitted statement from HDFC Bank at pages 6 & 7 of the paper book in support of the proposition. 7. Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 8. Upon careful consideration and considering the plea of the assessee and perusing the evidences submitted before us, we are of the opinion that investments cannot be construed as new and the assessee has duly produced the evidence of the source. Hence, we set aside the orders of the authorities below. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 20 th day of September, 2023. Sd/- sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated the 20 th day of September, 2023 TS ITA No.202/AGR/2022 4 Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT (A) 5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.