Shri Surendra Malik, Shamli V. ITO, Shamli

ITA 2165/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 216520114 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 15-12-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: ANKIT GUPTA
• Keywords: Peak credit

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-1 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2165/DEL/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SURENDRA MALIK, S/O PITAM SINGH, SHIV VIHAR, RAIL PAR, SHMLI. PAN : AJQPM9431L VS. ITO, WARD-2, SHAMLI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ANKIT GUPTA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.K. JAIN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 15.12.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 16.12.2016 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 19.01.2015 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. IT IS A RECALLED MATTER INASMUCH AS THE EARLI ER EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE BENCH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY RECALLED VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 22.8.2016 IN MA NO.22/DEL/2016. ITA NO.2165/DEL/2015 2 3. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAIN ST THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS.12,14,500/-. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FA CTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS.19,13,500/- IN HIS B ANK ACCOUNT ON VARIOUS DATES. ON BEING CALLED UPON TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE O F SUCH DEPOSITS, THE ASSESSEE EARLIER STATED THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS DURING THE YEAR. LATER ON, THE STAND WAS CHANGED AN D IT WAS PUT FORTH THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF VEHI CLES AND ADVANCES RECEIVED AGAINST SALE OF PROPERTIES. THE AO OBSERV ED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CHANGING ITS STAND ABOUT THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS. C OMPUTING THE PEAK CREDIT, THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS.12,15,100/- U/S 68 OF TH E ACT, WHICH GOT CONFIRMED IN THE FIRST APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGR IEVED AGAINST THE SUSTENANCE OF THIS ADDITION. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LD. AR DID NOT DISPUTE THAT THE SUSTEN ANCE OF ADDITION ON PEAK CREDIT. HOWEVER, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE PEAK CR EDIT WAS WRONGLY COMPUTED BY THE AO AND THE SAME GOT CONFIRMED AS SU CH. A PRAYER WAS MADE THAT CORRECT AMOUNT OF PEAK CREDIT BE DETERMIN ED AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME. THE SAME WAS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE LD. DR. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND R EMIT THE MATTER TO THE ITA NO.2165/DEL/2015 3 FILE OF AO FOR COMPUTING THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF PEAK CREDIT FOR MAKING ADDITION, AFTER ALLOWING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASS ESSEE OF BEING HEARD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COU RT ON 16 TH DECEMBER, 2016. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 16 TH DECEMBER, 2016. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI