Pradip Kumar Das, Koraput V. ITO, Jeypore

ITA 209/CTK/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3780 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 24-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K PRADHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: P C SETHI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.209/CTK/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 2010 PRADIP KUMAR DAS, PHD COLONY, KORAPUT, ODISHA VS. ITO, WARD - 2, JEYPORE PAN/GIR NO. BAXPP 2445 N (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P.C.SETHI, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN, DR DATE OF HEARING : 24 /05/ 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26/05 / 2017 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAI NST THE ORDER OF CIT( A) - BERHAMPUR, DATED 24.2.2014 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 . 2. THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.6 LAKHS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM M/S. SUNLEY JEWELLERS, KORAPUT. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE UNDISPUTED FACTS OF THE CARE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTRIBUTED RS.6 LAKHS DURING THE YEAR UNDER APPE AL TOWARDS HIS CAPITAL IN THE FI RM M/S. SUNLEY JEWLLERS, KORAPUT. THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS, FILED CAPITAL ACCOUNT FOR THE LAST THREE ASSESSMENT 2 ITA NO.209/CTK/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 YEARS VIZ; 2007 - 08, 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 2010 FOR THE YEAR ENDED ON 31.3.2007. THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN OPENING CAPITAL OF RS.6,26,246/ - WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GR OUND THAT IT WAS AN AFTERTHOUGHT AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 AND, THEREFORE, HE DID NOT ACCEPT THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT OF RS.6 LAKHS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AS CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM M/S. SUNELY JEWELLERS, KORAPUT AND MADE ADDITION TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. 4. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE CORROBORATING EVIDENCE SUCH AS COP Y OF BANK ACCOUNT OR RECEIPT OF ANY MONEY FROM SALE OF ANY INVESTMENTS OR PROPERTY TO SUPPORT ITS CONTENTION THAT HE HAD ENOUGH CASH WITH HIM TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT. 5. IN THE ABOVE BACKGROUND OF THE CASE, LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE AND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THIS BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OTHER PARTNERSHIP FIRM NAMELY BHAGABAN NATH IN ITA NO.205/CTK/2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 ORDER DATED 28.3.2017. 6. I FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF BHAGABAN NATH (SUPRA) HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SALES PROCEEDS OF HOUSE OF RS.21 LAKHS AND FROM THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD EXPLAIN THE INVESTMENT TO THE EXTENT OF RS.5 LAKHS BUT COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE INVESTMENT OF RS.1 LAKH AND, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.1 LAKH WAS SUSTAINED BY THE TRIBUNAL. IN THE PRESENT 3 ITA NO.209/CTK/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 CASE ALSO, I FIND THAT THERE IS NO SUCH RECEIPTS FROM SALE OF HOUSE PROPERTY BY THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE INVESTMENT OF RS.6 LAKHS MADE IN THE PA RTNERSHIP FIRM TOWARDS CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION. HENCE, I FIND NO GOOD AND JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), WHICH IS HEREBY CONFIRMED AND GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL F ILED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 /05/2017 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - ( N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 26 /05/2017 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : PRADIP KUMAR DAS, PHD COLONY, KORAPUT, ODISHA 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, WARD - 2, JEYPORE 3. THE CIT(A) - 1, B HUBANESWAR 4. PR.CIT - 1 , BHUBANESWAR 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// 4 ITA NO.209/CTK/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009 - 2010 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 24 /05 /17 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 24 /05 /17 (DICTATION PAD HAS BEEN ENCLOSED ALONG WITH ORIGINAL FILE) SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS/P S 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE H.C. 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE SPS 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.