Smt. Shakuntala Devi Saraf, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 33(1), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2147/KOL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9318 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 01-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K PRAMANICK D R
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

, . . , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH : KOLKATA ( ) . . , [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI B.R.MITTAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER] / I.T.A NO. 2147/KOL/2010 ! ! ! ! / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SMT. SHAKUNTALA DEVI SARAF, KOLKATA -VS.- IN COME TAX OFFICER, WARD-33(1), KOLKATA (PAN : AIZPS 0444 H) ( '# '# '# '# /APPELLANT ) ( $%'# $%'# $%'# $%'# / RESPONDENT ) '# '# '# '# / FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI SUBHAS AGARWAL, A.R. $%'# $%'# $%'# $%'# / FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI A.K. PRAMANICK, D.R. &' / ORDER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XX, KOLKATA DA TED 17.08.2010 ALONGWITH AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 7 DAYS ON T HE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- (1) THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS WRONG IN CONFIRMING TH E ADDITION OF RS.3,53,300/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT, IGNORING THE EVIDENCES PUT FORTH BEFORE HIM. (2) THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS WRONG IN HOLDING THE S UM OF RS.3,10,300/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT FOR AY 2006-07, WHEN THE CR EDIT RELATED TO THE AY 2004-05. (3) THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS WRONG IN HOLDING THE S UM OF RS.43,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN SO FAR AS THE AFORESAID INTEREST FREE LOAN WAS RETURNED TO THE CREDITOR ON 03.05.2006 VIDE AN ACCO UNT PAYEE CHEQUE. (4) THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) I S AGAINST LAW AND FACT OF THE CASE. 2. IN RESPECT OF DELAY, THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESEN TATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS ON THE LINES OF THE CONTENTS OF THE APP LICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DATED 30.11.2010 FILED AND THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE HAS NOT DISPUTED THE SAID CONTENTS THAT ITA NO.2147/KOL./2010 2 THE DELAY WAS DUE TO SICKNESS OF THE LD. A.R. OF TH E ASSESSEE. HENCE, I CONDONE THE DELAY OF 7 DAYS. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. D.R. HAS FILED A PAPER BOOK AND STATED THAT THE LOAN CONFIRMATION, COPIES OF BILLS IN RESPECT OF PURCHAS E/ SALE OF SHARES FROM/ TO SHRI T.Y. BHUTIA, BANK STATEMENT AND SIMILARLY THE BANK STATEMENT OF SMT. DOMA LHAMU, LOAN CREDITOR, COPY OF RECORD SLIP OF HER CHEQUE BOOK, PLACED RESPECTIVELY AT PAGES 14 TO 18 AND 20 TO 22 WERE NOT PLACED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW DUE TO THE REAS ONS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE CONS IDERATIONS OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE ENTRIES I N THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT IF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS ARE CONSIDERE D TO ADJUDICATE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE, HE NEEDS TIME TO GO THROUGH THE AS SESSMENT RECORD. 4. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERIN G THE DOCUMENTS, PROPOSED TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJ ECTION. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. REPR ESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES, THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WITH A DIRECTION THAT HE WILL RE-DECIDE THE GENUINENESS OF THE ENTRIES IN RESPECT OF THE AMOUNT UNDER CONSIDERATION AFTER GIV ING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO CONSIDERING THE REQUISITE DOCUMEN TS, AS MAY BE FILED BEFORE HIM. WE MAY STATE THAT IF THE ASSESEE FAILS TO COOPERATE, THE A SSESSING OFFICER WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL BEFORE HIM. HENCE, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07.03.2011. SD/- [ B.R. MITTAL / . . ] JUDICIAL MEMBER/ DATED : 07/ 03 / 2011 ITA NO.2147/KOL./2010 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SMT. SHAKUNTALA DEVI SARAF, 53, CHOWRINGHEE ROAD, KOLKATA-71. 2 ITO, WARD-33(1), KOLKATA. 10B, MIDDLETON ROW, KOLKA TA-71. 3. CIT(A)- ,KOLKATA 4. CIT, KOLKATA- 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T., KOLKATA LAHA, SR. P.S.