DCIT, Trichy V. Shri S.P.Natarajan, Pudukkottai

ITA 2102/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5080 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: I VIJAYAKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIVATSAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH C CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O. K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER .. I.T.A. NO.2102/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-I, TIRUCHIRAPALLI. V. SHRI S.P. NATARAJAN, NO. 5400, 2 ND STREET, MARTHANDAPURAM, PUDUKOTTAI. (PAN: AJUPS2204D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI I. VIJAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. SRIVATSAN O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(AP PEALS), TRICHY IN ITA NO. 213/08-09 DATED 14-09-2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. SHRI I. VIJAYAKUMAR, LEARNED CIT-DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND SHRI S. SRIVATSAN, CA REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED DR THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF MONEY LENDING AND ALSO GETTING COMMISSION INCOME. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN A SKED ABOUT HIS BANK ACCOUNTS TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE DI D NOT HAVE ANY BANK I.T.A. NO. 2102/MDS/2010 2 ACCOUNT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT SUBSEQUENTLY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS ABLE TO FIND A BANK ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE IN ICICI BANK, PUDUKOTTAI WHEREIN IT WAS NOTICED THAT THERE WERE TRANSACTIONS FOR MORE THAN ` 1 CRORE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ADDED BACK THE CREDIT TO THE EXTENT OF ` 52,34,966/- AS THE UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPOR TUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER EXAMINED THE DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE ASSE SSEE AND DELETED THE ADDITION. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS LIABLE TO BE REVERSED. 4. IN REPLY, IT WAS FAIRLY AGREED BY THE LEARNED AU THORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT STATEMENTS REPRESENTING THE CASH-FLOW STATEMENT AS ALSO THE STATEMENTS OF THE OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT BEEN P RODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ON BEING QUESTIONED BY THE BENC H AS TO WHY THE ADDITION AS DELETED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD NOT BE RESTORE D ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CATEGORICALLY ADMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT HE DID NOT HAVE ANY BANK ACCOUNTS AND THE ASSESSING OFFICE R HAD IN FACT FOUND THE BANK ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WITH ICICI BANK , IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS THAT OF THE JOINT FAMILY AND NO AD VERSE INFERENCE SHOULD BE DRAWN. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE REVENUE HAS RAISED A GROUND THAT THERE HAS BEEN VIOLATION O F RULE 46A. IT IS NOT THE I.T.A. NO. 2102/MDS/2010 3 GROUND OF THE REVENUE THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS LIABLE TO BE REVERSED ON ACCOUNT OF THE MIS-REPRESENTATION BY TH E ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL HAS TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A SSESSING OFFICER FOR RE- ADJUDICATION AND WE DO SO. HERE CONSIDERING THE FA CT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT COME WITH OPEN HANDS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER A ND HAS SPECIFICALLY ADMITTED THAT HE DID NOT HAVE ANY BANK ACCOUNT COMPELLING TH E ASSESSING OFFICER TO HUNT FOR HIS BANK ACCOUNT AND BRING IT ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS CASE CALLS FOR LEVY OF COST OF ` 5,000/-. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER F OR READJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE H IS CASE AS ALSO TO EXPLAIN THE ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE SHALL PA Y COST OF ` 5,000/- TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE REVENUE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 18-05-2 011. SD/- SD/- (DR. O. K. NARAYANAN) (GEORGE MATHAN) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 18 TH MAY, 2011. H. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE