DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Sushil Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 2073/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7612 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 27-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R R KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S K GUPTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI A. T. VARKEY , JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO. - 2073/DEL/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR - 200 8 - 0 9 ) DCIT VS. SH. SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA CIRCLE - 30 (1), 24/24, ANSARI ROAD, NEW DELHI. DARYA GANJ, NEW DELHI - 1100 02 . PAN: AA IPG2558H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY: - SH. B. R.R. KUMAR , SR.DR. ASSESSEE BY: - SH. S. K. GUPTA , CA. DATE OF HEARING: 27.11.2014 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON: 27.11.2014 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 1 6 . 0 2.2012 OF LD. CIT (APPEALS) - X XV , NEW DELHI. 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL READS AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) - XXV, NEW DELHI HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.20,80,807/ - MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF LOAN. 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, NOTICE D , THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN A TOTAL LOAN OF RS. 1,58,45,046/ - FROM HIS WIFE SMT. VIDULA GUPTA WHICH INCLUDED A SUM OF 2 RS.20,80,807/ - WHICH HAD BEEN TAKEN IN THE CURRENT YEAR. THE AO MADE THE ADDITION OF THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.20,80,807/ - ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE S WIFE WAS NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED , THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MA TTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT SMT. VIDULA GUPTA HAD BEEN FILING A REGULAR RETURNS AND SHE HAD HER CAPITAL FROM THE SALE OF PROPERTY FOR RS.1,80,00,000/ - ON WHICH SHE EARNED THE CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.1,58,12,860/ - AND ALSO MADE A DECLARATION UNDER VDIS, 1997 FOR RS.44,20,139/ - AND THAT THE INVESTMENTS WERE SOLD FOR RS.56,11,555/ - DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1998 - 99. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT SHE HAD HUGE CAPITAL IN THE BALANCE SHEET AND THE SAME WERE OF RS.1,28,57,491/ - AS ON 31.03.2004, RS.2 ,96,57,813/ - AS ON 31.03.2005, RS.3,06,40,453/ - AS ON 31.03.2006, RS.3,15,50,205/ - AS ON 31.03.2007 AND RS.3,27,54,123/ - AS ON 31.03.2008. IT WAS STATED THAT THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITION WHEN THE CREDITOR HAD SUFFICIENT MONEY IN HER BALANCE SHEET. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS NO DOUBT ABOUT THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE LOANS AS THE CREDITOR HAD SUFFICIENT MONEY AS HER CAPITAL . HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE AO MAD E THE ADDITION WITHOUT ANY SUFFICIENT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION WAS DELETED. NOW THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL. 6. THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND REITERATED THE OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30. 12.2010 . IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. 3 COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE HIM. 6 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVA ILABLE ON RECORD . IN THE INSTANT CASE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING SUFFICIENT CAPITAL IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AS WELL AS THE PRECEDING YEAR S, OUT OF WHICH THE LOAN WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO AN ADMITTED FACT TH AT FOR THE PRECEDING YEARS FROM THE SAME SOURCE THE LOAN GIVEN BY SMT. VIDULA GUPTA TO HER HUSBAND I.E. ASSESSEE HAD BEEN ACCEPTED , T HEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AND THE LD. CIT(A) RIGHTLY DELETED THE SAME. WE DO NOT SEE ANY INFI RMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 7 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 /11/2014. SD/ - SD/ - ( A. T. VARKEY ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 27 /11/2014 *AK VERMA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR