Shri Gajraj Singh, New Delhi V. DCIT, Gurgaon

ITA 2157/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3158 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Application of stay
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH - D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2157/DEL/20 16 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 AND STAY NO. 276/DEL/2016 (IN ITA NO. 2157/DEL/2016) ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 SHRI GAJRAJ SINGH C/O M/S. RRA TAXINDIA, D-28, SOUTH EXTENSION, PART-1, NEW DELHI 110 049 PANAMAPS8793E VS. DCIT CIRCLE-2, GURGAON (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PER BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-1, GURGAON DATED 21 ST MARCH, 2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, CHALLENGING THE A DDITION OF ASSESSEE BY : DR. RAKESH GUPTA, SHRI TARUN KUMAR, ADVOCATE DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI SHAILESH THAKUR, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 11/05/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12 /05/2017 ITA NO. 2157/DEL/2016 AND STAY NO. 276/DEL/2016 SHRI GAJRAJ SINGH VS. DCIT PAGE 2 OF 5 RS. 33,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT U/S 68 O F THE I.T. ACT. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE RECEIVED HUGE AMOUNT OF RS. 33,00,000/-. THE ASSESSE STATED THAT AN AMOUNT WA S RELATED TO LOAN REPAYMENT BY DIFFERENT PARTIES WHICH WERE E ARLIER GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE YEAR 2007-08 AND 2008- 09. THE SUMMARY OF THE SAME IS NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS TO SHOW THAT IN EARLIER YEARS LOAN WAS GIVEN BY ASSESS EE TO SHRI VIJAY KUMAR, SMT. SAVITA, SHRI VINOD KUMAR, SHRI CHA TTAR SINGH AND SHRI NIRANJAN LAL. THE ASSESSEE IN THE YEA R UNDER APPEAL RECEIVED BACK THE AMOUNT OF LOAN OF RS. 33,0 0,000/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE CASE OF SMT. SAVITA A CCEPTED THE RETURN OF REPAYMENT OF LOAN OF RS. 20,00,000/- WHIC H WAS RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 33,00,000/- BECAUSE THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF RECEIPT IS NOT SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED BY ASSESSEE . THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE AMOUN T WAS RECEIVED THAT FROM VARIOUS CREDITORS IN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL WHICH WAS FRIENDLY LOAN. DURING THE REMAND ITA NO. 2157/DEL/2016 AND STAY NO. 276/DEL/2016 SHRI GAJRAJ SINGH VS. DCIT PAGE 3 OF 5 PROCEEDINGS ASSESSING OFFICER SUMMONED ALL THE PART IES ABOVE, HOWEVER THREE OF THEM APPEARED BEFORE ASSESS ING OFFICER NAMELY SHRI VINOD KUMAR, SHRI CHHATTAR SING H AND SHRI NIRANJAN LAL AND THEIR STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN RECORDED IN WHICH THEY HAVE ADMITTED THAT CASH WAS ONLY REPAYME NT OF LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH WERE TAKEN IN EARLIER YE ARS. HOWEVER IN RESPECT OF SHRI VIJAY KUMAR AND SMT. SAVI TA, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SUMMONS COULD NOT BE SERVED UPON THEM BECAUSE BOTH OF THEM BEING HUSBAND AND WIFE ADMITTE D IN FORTIS HOSPITAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF KIDNEY TRANSPLAN T OPERATION. LD. CIT(A) HOWEVER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED SOURCE OF CASH. THE ADDITION WAS CONFIRMED AND APPE AL OF ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISMISSED 3. AFTER CONSIDERING RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE ARE OF TH E VIEW ADDITION IS WHOLLY UNJUSTIFIED. IT IS ADMITTED FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN LOANS TO FIVE PARTIES IN THE YEAR 2007-08 AND 2008- 09. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 33,00,000/- HAS BEEN RECEIVED BACK AS REPAYMENT OF THE LOANS. IN THE CASE OF SMT. SAVITA THE REPAYMENT OF RS. 20,00,000/- THROUGH CHEQUE HAS NOT BEEN DOUBTED BY THE ITA NO. 2157/DEL/2016 AND STAY NO. 276/DEL/2016 SHRI GAJRAJ SINGH VS. DCIT PAGE 4 OF 5 ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE OFF ICE NOTE ATTACHED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER REFERRED THE INF ORMATION TO THE CONCERNED ASSESSING OFFICER FOR TAKING ACTIO N AGAINST THE CREDITORS FOR REPAYMENT OF LOANS EXCEEDING RS. 20,000/- IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 269 OF THE ACT. THIS WILL PROV E THAT ASSESSIGN OFFICER WAS SATISFIED THAT THESE WERE GEN UINE LOAN REPAYMENT BY THE ABOVE CREDITORS TO THE ASSESSEE. E VEN THREE OF THE CREDITORS APPEARED BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER IN REMAND PROCEEDINGS HAVE CONFIRMED REPAYMENT OF LOAN AMOUNT TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CASE OF TWO OTHER CREDITOR SHIR VI JAY KUMAR AND SMT SAVITA, THEY COULD NOT APPEAR IN THE REMAN D PROCEEDINGS BECAUSE THEY WERE ADMITTED IN FORTIS HO SPITAL FOR KIDNEY TRANSPLANT OPERATION. SO NO ADVERSE INFERENC E SHOULD BE DRAWN. THEREFORE CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ABOVE DISCUSSION, ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THERE WAS A GENUINE REPAYMENT OF LOAN AMOUNTS TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS BEEN PROVED BY THE CREDITORS IN THEIR STATEMENTS. THEREFORE ADDITION OF RS. 33,00,000/- A GAINST THE ASSESSEE IS WHOLLY UNJUSTIFIED. THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE AMOUNT RECEIVED AS REPAYMENT OF L OAN. IN ITA NO. 2157/DEL/2016 AND STAY NO. 276/DEL/2016 SHRI GAJRAJ SINGH VS. DCIT PAGE 5 OF 5 THIS VIEW OF MATTER, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF AUT HORITIES BELOW AND DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 33,00,000/-. 4. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. STAY APPLICATION STANDS INFRUCTUOUS. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (B.P. JAIN) ( BHAVNESH SAINI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 12 /05/2017 *VEENA* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. PRINCIPAL CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR