The ITO, Ward-9(1), Surat V. Shri Ashwinbhai Laljibhai Kachhadiya, Surat

ITA 2203/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 94797 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 26-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 02-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V K SINGH
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD , , BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.2203/AHD/2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-9(1) SURAT / VS. SHRI ASHWINBHAI LALJIBHAI KACHHADIYA 20, YAMUNA KUNJ SOC. KAPODARA 4 RASTA VARACHHA ROAD, SURAT ' ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : 2008-09 ( '% / APPELLANT ) .. ( &''% / RESPONDENT ) '%( / APPELLANT BY : SHRI V.K. SINGH, SR.DR &''%)( / RESPONDENT BY : -NONE- *) / DATE OF HEARING 26/11/2015 +,-.) / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30/11/2015 / O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-V, SURAT [CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 25/05/2011 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2008-09. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - [1] ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 11,94,000/- ITA NO.2203/AHD /2011 ITO VS. SH ASHWINBHAI LAJIBHAI KACHHADIYA ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 2 - MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTM ENT IN FDRS. [2] ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. [3] IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE APPELLATE ORD ER OF THE LD.CIT(A) MAY BE CANCELLED AND THE ORDER OF THE A.O. MAY BE U PHELD. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHAL F OF THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE, DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF H EARING. IT IS TRANSPIRED THAT NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, THE REFORE THE APPEAL IS BEING DECIDED EX-PARTE IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND IS AGAINST DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.11,94,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE (AO IN SHORT) ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT IN FDRS. THE LD.SR.DR SUBMI TTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITIO N. HE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS CASH DEPOSITS, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT EXPLA INED THE SOURCE OF SUCH CASH DEPOSITS, THEREFORE THE AO WAS JUSTIFIED IN MA KING THE ADDITION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD.SR.DR, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW. WE FIND THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE, BY OBSERVING A S UNDER:- 6. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WEL L AS SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT ALONG WITH BANK STATEMENTS. FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT IS QUITE OBVIOUS THAT THE AMOUNT INVESTED IN FDRS HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY BECA USE IT WAS NOT SHOW IN THE APPELLANTS BALANCE SHEET. THE A.O., IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, HAS OBSERVED THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BAN K WAS RS.15,09,000/- ITA NO.2203/AHD /2011 ITO VS. SH ASHWINBHAI LAJIBHAI KACHHADIYA ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 3 - OUT OF WHICH RS.11,94,000/- WAS INVESTED IN FDRS. THE A.O. HAS ADDED THE INVESTED AMOUNT ONLY NOT THE WHOLE DEPOSIT MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE APPELLANTS SUBMISSION THAT THE SOURC E OF CASH DEPOSIT WAS EXPLAINED TO THE A.O., APPEARS TO BE CORRECT OT HERWISE THE WHOLE DEPOSIT WOULD HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME. JUST BECAUSE THE INVESTMENT REMAINED TO BE SHOWN IN THE BALANCE-SHEE T, THE INVESTMENT DOES NOT BECOME UNACCOUNTED. THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT APPEARS TO BE CORRECT AND THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT STANDS E XPLAINED. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT IS H EREBY DELETED AND THE GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 4.1. FROM THE ABOVE FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A), IT I S EVIDENT THAT THE SAME IS BASED ON PRESUMPTION. THEREFORE, WE DEEM I T PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE GROUND T O THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING REASO NABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO BOTH THE PARTIES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON MONDAY, THE 30 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( ) ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ( KUL BHARAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 30/ 11 /2015 2.., .../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ITA NO.2203/AHD /2011 ITO VS. SH ASHWINBHAI LAJIBHAI KACHHADIYA ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 4 - !'#$%&' &$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '% / THE APPELLANT 2. &''% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 345 6 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 6 ( ) / THE CIT(A)-V, SURAT 5. 7 8&45 , 45. , 3 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 8:;<* / GUARD FILE. ! / BY ORDER, '7& //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 26.XI.15 (DICTATION-PAD 4 - PAGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER .. 26.XI.15 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S. 30.11.15 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 30.11.15 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER