DCIT, New Delhi V. Shri Satyendra Kumar Tyagi, Ghaziabad

ITA 2211/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0041 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 29-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R R KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: RANJAN BHATIA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO . 2211 /DEL / 2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF VS. SH. SATYENDRA KUMAR TYAGI, INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 41(1), C - 17, SURYA NAGAR, GHAZIABAD NEW DELHI (PAN: AAGPT6219E ) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. B.R.R. KUMAR, SR. DR RESPONDEN T BY: SH. RANJAN BHATIA, ADV. DATE OF HEARING: 2 9.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06.05.2015 ORDER PER SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, A.M. : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 IMPUGNING THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) - XXX, NEW DELHI, DATED 28.02.2011 RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) H AS ERRED IN: I. DELETING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT OF RS. 33,49,200/ - (I.E. RS. 18,00,000/ - + RS. 15,00,000/ - BEING CASH DEPOSITED AND + RS. 49,200/ - ) OTHER CREDITS. II. IN DELETING THE ABOVE ADDITION THE ORDER OF LD. CIT( A) IS BAD AS WELL AS PERVERSE IN LAW AS IT SUMMARILY DISMISSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WITHOUT DISCUSSING AND REBUTTING THE SAME (THOUGH CLEARLY BROUGHT OUT ON RECORD IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER) AND HAS BEEN DECIDED UPON BY IGNORING THE FACTS ALL TOGETHER. III. T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 33,49,200/ - IN TWO BANK ACCOUNTS DOES NOT PERTAIN TO ASSESSEE BUT TO HUF IGNORING 2 ITA NO. 2211/DEL /2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE IN ANY MANNER THE OWNERSHIP AND SALE OF ANY AGRICULTURAL LAND BY HUF FROM WHICH THESES CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNTS ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN MADE. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL DERIVING INCOME UNDER THE HEADS SALARY AND OTHER SOURCES . FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2008 - 09, THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 23 RD JULY, 2008, DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 7,41,700/ - . THE SAID RETURN OF INCOME WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT ) WAS PASSED ON 29 .12.2010 AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 41,62,900/ - AFTER MAKING ADDITION OF CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 33,49,200/ - . IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT NO. 55008070641 WITH THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA, SURYA NAGAR, GHAZIABAD, BELONGS TO H UF OF WHICH THE APPELLANT IS A COPARCENER. 3. AS REGARD CHEQUE DEPOSITS OF RS. 15 LAKHS IN THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA, SURYA NAGAR, GHAZIABAD, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS AMOUNT WAS TRANSFERRED BY THE CHEQUE FROM THE O.N. TYAGI HUF S ACCOUNT NO. 09466001 WITH PNB ROORKEE AND HUF IN TURN DEPOSITED THE CASH OUT OF THE SALE PROCEEDS OF ANCESTRAL LAND IN THE SAID ACCOUNT OF PNB, ROORKEE. THIS EXPLANATION WAS NOT BELIEVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THEREFORE ADDED A SUM OF RS. 33,49,200 / - . AGGRIEVED, AN APPEA L WAS FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.02.2011, ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER CONSIDERING THE INFORMATION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE. HENCE, THE REVENUE FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL. 3 ITA NO. 2211/DEL /2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 4. IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LEA RNED DR THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION WITHOUT EXAMINING THE TAXABILITY OF THIS AMOUNT IN THE HANDS OF THE HUF AND PLACED HEAVY RELIANCE ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE SHORT ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL FOR OUR ADJUDICATIO N IS WHETHER THE EXPLANATION TENDERED BY THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF THE SOURCES FOR CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IS TENABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW . WE NOTICE FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD THAT THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE FURNISHED COPIES OF SALE DEE D OF THE ANCESTRAL AGRICULTURAL LANDS IN SUPPORT OF THE AVAILABILITY OF THE CASH IN THE HANDS OF HUF. THE ONLY CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER APPEARS TO BE THAT THERE WAS NO MENTION ABOUT THE HUF EITHER IN THE SALE DEEDS ETC. AND THEREFORE, THE A.O. I S OF THE OPINION THAT THE EXPLANATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE ISSUE TO BE EXAMINED IS WHETHER THERE IS A SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND AS STATED BY THE RESPONDENT OR NOT AND WHETHER THE LANDS BELONG TO HUF OR INDIVIDUAL IS IMMATERIAL , I NSOFAR AS THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS ARE CONCERNED. THE EVIDENCE PLACED BY THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE DISPLACED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREFORE AS A NATURAL COROLLARY IT IMPLIES THAT THE SALE PROCEEDS OF THE AGRICULTURAL LANDS ARE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSE OR HIS HUF AND THE SAME MONEY 4 ITA NO. 2211/DEL /2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 WAS UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEPOSIT IN BOTH THE AFORESAID ACCOUNTS . THEREFORE, THE CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS STAND EXPLAINED AND NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR. THE EXPLANATION TENDERED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS T O BE ACCEPTED AS A REASONABLE AND PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS. HENCE, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED . THE DECISION IS P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 T H M AY , 2015. S D / - S D / - (I.C. SUDHIR ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 6 T H MAY , 2015. RK/ - COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI