Ravdeep Singh Kharbanda, Mohali V. DCIT, Mohali

ITA 225/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9896 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 225/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI RAVDEEP SINGH KHARBANDA VS THE DCIT, # 2189, PHASE VII, CIRCLE 6(1), MOHALI. MOHALI. PAN: AIOPK6574F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI PARIKSHIT AGGA RWAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 17.06.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.06.2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-2 CHANDIGARH DATED 07.01.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,54,788/-. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ABOVE ADDITION AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN PURCHASE OF FLAT. BRIEFLY FA CTS ON THIS ISSUE ARE THAT ASSESSEE MADE INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF FLAT OF RS. 38,54,788/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER QUERIED REGARDING THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT. THE ASSESSEE'S EXPLANATION REGARDING SOURCE WAS NOT ACCEPTED AND ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ABOVE ADDITION 2 TREATING THE SAME AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) THAT RS. 2,54,788/- WAS ADDED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME WHICH WAS PAID IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 THEREFORE, NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 UNDER APPEAL. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, DID NOT ACCEPT CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF TH E ABOVE INVESTMENT AND ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT ADDITION IS WHOLLY UNJUSTIFIED. IT IS AD MITTED FACT THAT ASSESSEE MADE INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF F LAT IN A SUM OF RS. 38,54,788/-. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINE D THAT RS. 19 LACS WAS TAKEN AS LOAN FROM ING VYSYA BANK AND RS. 15 LACS HAVE BEEN TAKEN FROM SHRI ARDAMAN SINGH AND MRS. BIRINDER KAUR (FATHER-IN-LAW AND MOTHER-IN-LAW OF THE ASSESSEE). THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN RECEIVED IN THE JOINT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND MANMEET KAUR. FOR REST OF THE SOURCE OF AMOUNT OF RS. 4,54,788/-, ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE SAME TO BE OUT O F PAST SAVINGS, HOWEVER, ASSESSING OFFICER ACCEPTED R S. 2 LACS AND MADE ADDITION OF RS. 2,54,788/-. IT IS CL EAR FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD THAT THE LOAN AMOUNT AN D OTHER AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM THE FAMILY MEMBER HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH HAVE BEEN RECEIVED IN JANUARY,2008 AND FEBRUARY,2008. THE 3 ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BEF ORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN WHICH ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT LAST PAYMENT OF PURCHASE OF PROPERTY WAS MADE ON 05.03.2008 BY CHEQUE OF RS. 4 LACS AND GIVEN THE DETAILS OF TOTAL PAYMENT OF RS. 38,54,787/- THROUGH THE CHEQUES ONLY WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS, THEREFORE, CLEAR THAT LAST PAYMENT FOR PURCHASE OF PROPERTY WAS MADE THROUGH CHEQUE IN MARCH,2008. THEREFORE, ALL THE PAYMENTS ARE PROVED TO HAVE BEEN MADE FOR PURCHASE OF FLAT IN FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08 WHICH IS RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. SINCE NO PAYMENT HAVE BEE N MADE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL I.E. 2009-10, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION TO MAKE ANY ADDITION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE ADDITION DESERV ES TO BE DELETED. 5. I, ACCORDINGLY, SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF AUTHORIT IES BELOW AND DELETE THE ENTIRE ADDITION. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21 ST JUNE, 2016. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD