Subhash Chandra Tandon, Kutch V. ACIT, Central Circle- 17, New Delhi

ITA 2061/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6203 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 23-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NIDHI SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: R K KAPOOR
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 69A; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI B BEN CH, NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL M EMBER ITA NO. 2061/DEL/2018 [A.Y 2014-15] SUBHASH CHANDRA TANDON VS. THE A.C.I.T BUNGALOW NO. 85, RIVERIA CENT RAL CIRCLE-17 NEAR AIRPORT REVENUE NEW DELHI SURVEY NO. 548/2, VERSAMEDI ANJAR, GUJARAT PAN: AAJPT 5649 R [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 09.09.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.09.2021 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI R.K. KAPOOR, CA REVENUE BY : MS. NIDHI SRIVASTAVA, CIT-DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [APPEALS]-27, NEW DELHI DATED 16.01.2018 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2 2. THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE GRIEVANCE OF THE AS SESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF R S. 2,54,200/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH U/S 69A OF THE INCOME T AX ACT, 1961 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT' FOR SHORT]. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT A SEARCH AND SEIZURE AND SURVEY OPERATIONS U/S 132/132A OF THE ACT WERE CONDUCTION ON 27.12.2013 IN METENERE GROUP AND THE ASSESSEE WAS P ART OF THE SEARCH OPERATIONS. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDING S, CASH AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,54,200/- WAS FOUND, OUT OF WHICH RS. 2 LAK HS WAS SEIZED. 4. ON A SPECIFIC QUESTION ASKED BY THE INVESTIGATIO N OFFICERS TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH OF RS. 2,54,200/-, THE A SSESSEE REPLIED THAT IT WAS OUT OF SAVINGS OF PAST 10 YEARS KEPT AT HOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF MEDICAL EMERGENCIES. WHEN ASKED FOR ANY DOCUMENTAR Y EVIDENCES, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT GIVE ANY SPECIFIC REPLY. TH E ASSESSING OFFICER PROCEEDED BY TREATING THE AMOUNT OF RS. 2,54,200/- AS UNEXPLAINED AND MADE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 3 5. THE ASSESSEE AGITATED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS O F THE FIRM BELIEF THAT PROPER SECTION FOR MAKING THE ADDITION WAS U/S 69A OF THE ACT AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION U/S 69A OF THE ACT. 6. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHE MENTLY STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SENIOR CITIZEN OF AROUND 75 YEARS OF AGE AND BECAUSE OF MEDICAL EMERGENCIES, HE WAS KEEPING THE CASH AT HOME. BUT WHEN THE BENCH ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE, THE COUNSEL COULD NOT GIVE ANY PLAUSIBLE REPLY AND STATED THAT OUT OF RS. 2,54,200/-, ONLY RS. 2 LAKHS WERE SEIZED AND, THEREFORE, ADDITION SHOULD BE SUSTAINED TO THAT EXTENT. 7. THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF TH E LOWER AUTHORITIES. 8. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ORDERS OF THE A UTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS TRUE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SENIOR CITIZEN OF 75 YEARS OF AGE. THEREFORE, IT CAN BE EASILY ACCEPTED THAT HE MUST B E KEEPING CASH AT HOME FOR MEDICAL EMERGENCIES. BUT AT THE SAME TIME , NON-EXPLANATION OF THE SOURCE CANNOT BE BRUSHED ASIDE LIGHTLY. WE FIND THAT SEARCH 4 PARTY HAD SEIZED ONLY RS. 2 LAKHS WHICH MEANS THAT THE SEARCH PARTY ITSELF MUST HAVE ACCEPTED THE SOURCE FOR RS. RS. 54 ,200/-. IN LIGHT OF THESE FACTS, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RES TRICT THE DISALLOWANCE TO RS. 2 LAKHS ONLY. THE ASSESSEE SHALL GET PART R ELIEF. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 2061/DEL/2018 IS PARTLY ALLOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09.09. 2021 IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE RIVAL REPRESENTATIVES. SD/- SD/- [ SUCHITRA KAMBLE ] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 09 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 VL/ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI 5 DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER