Mrs Ruchira Maheshwari, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2083/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3653 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 07-07-2010
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: H K LAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K N BARRY

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.2083/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 MRS. RUCHIRA MAHESHWARI, INCOME-TAX OFFICER, C-111-112, NEW MULTAN NAGAR, VS. WARD 25(2), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN: AASPM3177M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.N. BARRY,, CA. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI H. K. LAL, SR. DR. O R D E R PER C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 0 1.02.2010 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) PE RTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2 2. IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE C IT(A)S ORDER IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.48,000/- OUT OF RS.84 ,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITU RE AND IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.53,450/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH INTRODUC ED IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE CAREFULL Y PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN THE ASSESSMENT, THE A SSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.84,000- ON ACCOUNT OF LOW HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWAL BY ESTIMATING THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AT RS.7,000/- PER MONTH. HOWEVER, ON AN APPEAL, THE CIT(A) REDUCED THE ADDITION TO RS.48,00 0/- BY ESTIMATING THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE AT R S.4,000/- PER MONTH. WHILE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE PER MONTH FROM RS.7,000/- TO RS.4,000/-, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS TA KEN INTO ACCOUNT THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES MADE BY OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS CON SISTING OF ASSESSEES IN-LAWS AND HUSBAND. THE CIT(A) HAS TAKEN NOTE OF THE FACT THAT THE TOTAL WITHDRAWAL MADE BY THE ASSESSEES FATHER-IN-LAW, AS SESSEES HUSBAND AND ASSESSEE WAS RS.1,95,000/-. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE T HAT THE FAMILY CONSISTS OF 4 MEMBERS INCLUDING 72 YEARS OLD IN-LAWS OF THE ASSES SEE. THERE IS NO CHILD. THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH HER HUSBAND LIVES JOINTLY W ITH IN-LAWS. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEES HUSBAND IS ALSO MAINTAININ G RESIDENCE AT DEHRADUN 3 WHERE HE HAD TO GO TO LOOK AFTER THE COMPANYS BUSI NESS. HOWEVER, THE OVERALL WITHDRAWAL BY 4 FAMILY MEMBERS AT RS.1,95,0 00/- IS SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY 4 MEMBERS INCLUDING THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY HUSBAND AT DEHRADUN. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO MAKE ANY FURTHER ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSES SEE ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES PARTICULARLY, IN VIEW OF THE FAC T THAT THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES HAVE BEEN JOINTLY MET BY THE FATHER-IN-LAW AND ASSESSEES HUSBAND. WE, THEREFORE, DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.48,000/- S USTAINED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). 4. THE NEXT ISSUE IS WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS.53,450/- (CORRECT AMOUNT IS RS.56,500/- AS IS CLEAR FROM THE AOS ORD ER) BEING THE MONEY INTRODUCED AFRESH IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE ASS ESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THIS ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE A.O. AS ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF MONEY DEPOSITED IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALSO CONFIRMED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THAT THE CASH M ONEY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.56,500/- WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE OUT OF THE WITHDRAWALS OF EARLIER YEARS. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS THAT THE SUM OF RS.56,500/- WAS DEPOSITED IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE BUSINESS OUT OF THE CASH MONEY OF RS.83,450/- AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESS EE AS ON 31 ST MARCH, 4 2005. IN SUPPORT THEREOF, THE ASSESSEE PREPARED ON E STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS AS ON 31.3.2005. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS REJECTED THIS EXPLANATION BY OBSERVING THAT THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS IS NOTHING BUT A SIMPLE MECHANICAL WORKING WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS WORKED OUT THE CASH IN HAND AT RS.83,450/-. AFTER CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO T BEEN ABLE TO PROVE OR ESTABLISH THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ACTUALLY MONEY IN C ASH AVAILABLE WITH HER TO THE EXTENT OF RS.83,450/- AS ON 31.3.2005, WHICH WA S SUBSEQUENTLY INTRODUCED IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES BUSINESS. THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS PREPARED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SUPPORTE D BY ANY EVIDENCE OR PARTICULARS. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SHO W AS TO HOW THE ASSESSEE COULD BE ABLE TO SAVE RS.83,450/-, WHICH COULD BE K EPT AS CASH IN HAND. THE ASSESSEE IS MAINTAINING A BANK ACCOUNT AND IS ALSO DOING A BUSINESS. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT PROBABLE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS KEEPING SUCH A HUGE MONEY OF RS.83,450/- AS CASH INSTEAD OF UTILIZING THE SAM E IN THE BUSINESS OR OTHERWISE, DEPOSITING IT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT BEEN ABLE TO SHOW AS TO HOW RS.83,450/- HAS BEEN ACCUMUL ATED WITH THE ASSESSEE OUT OF HER WITHDRAWALS WHEN ALL THE WITHDRAWALS MAD E BY THE ASSESSEE WERE UTILIZED TOWARDS HER PERSONAL EXPENDITURE AND MAINT ENANCE OF FAMILY. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SUSTAI NING THE ADDITION OF 5 RS.56,500/- INTRODUCED IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF TH E ASSESSEES BUSINESS. THUS THE ADDITION OF RS.56,500/- MADE BY THE AO AND SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS UPHELD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AS INDICATED ABOVE. 6. THIS DECISION IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9 TH JULY, 2010. SD/- SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) (C.L. SETHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 9 TH JULY, 2010. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT.