KESHV RAWAT, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 202/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5414 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA JCIT DHK

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 202/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09. SHRI KESHAV RAWAT, PROP. M/S. VIJAY LAXMI, 109, CHANDPOLE BAZAR, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ADOPR 9146 D VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (C.A.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJ MEHRA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 13/01/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29/02/2016. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A)-II, JAIPUR DATED 16.01.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. T HE FOLLOWING GROUNDS ARE RAISED :- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE T HE LD. CIT (A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 3,06,17 6/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS WITHOUT APPRECIATING FACT S AND SUBMISSION MADE ARBITRARILY. 1.1.THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED CONFIRMING THE A DDITION WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK ACC OUNT IS BACKED BY THE NECESSARY FUNDS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE IN SHAP E OF WITHDRAWAL MADE PRIOR TO THE DEPOSIT AND RECEIVED AGAINST THE USAGE OF CREDIT CARD, THUS THE ADDITION SUSTAINED OF RS. 3,06,176/- U/S 69 DESERVE S TO BE DELETED. 2 ITA NO. 202/JP/2014 SHRI KESHAV RAWAT VS. ITO 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT T HE ASSESSEE INDIVIDUAL IS PROPRIETOR OF M/S. VIJAY LAXMI ENGAGED IN RETAIL TR ADING OF ELECTRONIC ITEMS AND ACCESSORIES. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER CONTENDS THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE ASSESSEES SAVINGS BANK WERE MADE OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM HIS PROPRIETARY CONCERN M/S. VIJAY LAXMI. BESIDES, THE ASSESSEE, ON THE REQUEST OF HIS CLOSE RELATIVES ALLOWED THEM TO PURCHASE SOME GOODS BY USING HIS CREDIT CARD. SO ME OF THE ENTRIES REFLECTED THE AMOUNT RECEIVED BACK FROM SUCH RELATIVES. THUS THE HSBC DEPOSITS IN CASH WERE DULY EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH COPY OF ACCOUN T FROM HIS PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN AND CREDIT CARD STATEMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAVING SU FFICIENT CASH BALANCE AVAILABLE FROM ABOVE SOURCES, THE PRELIMINARY ONUS CAST ON THE ASS ESSEE STANDS DISCHARGED. IN ANY CASE, THE ASSESSEE IS A RETAIL TRADER, HSBC ACCOUNT BEING PART OF HIS BUSINESS, EVEN IF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AF ARE APPLIED, THE NET PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT EXCEED 5%. THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WITHOUT CONSIDERING ALL T HESE RELEVANT FACTS AND EVIDENCES HELD THAT THE ONUS HAS NOT BEEN DISCHARGED BY THE A SSESSEE, WHICH IS UNJUSTIFIED AND ARBITRARY. 3. THE LD. D/R SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES. 4. I HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED THAT THE AMOUNTS WERE SPENT B Y THE ASSESSEE BY USING HIS CREDIT CARD. THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION BEING SPENT FOR THE PU RCHASE OF GOODS, THE SALES THEREOF IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE. IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED REASONABLE EXPLANATION WHICH HAS NOT BEEN PROVED OT HERWISE. IN VIEW THEREOF, I AM INCLINED TO DELETE THE ADDITION. 3 ITA NO. 202/JP/2014 SHRI KESHAV RAWAT VS. ITO 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29/02/201 6. SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 29/02/2016. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI KESHAV RAWAT, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO WARD 4(1), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.202/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 4 ITA NO. 202/JP/2014 SHRI KESHAV RAWAT VS. ITO