Kulwinder Singh, Ludhiana V. ITO-Ward-2(4), Ludhiana

ITA 227/CHANDI/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0436 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA DHAR
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठच瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ च瀃डीगढ़ 瀈यायपीठ ‘ए एए ए’, च瀃डीगढ़ च瀃डीगढ़च瀃डीगढ़ च瀃डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर आयकरआयकर आयकर अपील अपीलअपील अपील सं संसं सं./ ITA No. 227/CHD/2020 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Kulwinder Singh, S/o Shri Manjit Singh, # 301-B, Model Town, Ludhiana. बनाम VS The ITO Ward 2(4), Ludhiana. . 瀡थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AQCPS3542B अपीलाथ牸/Appellant 灹瀄यथ牸/Respondent िनधा榁琇रती क琉 ओर से/Assessee by : None राज瀡व क琉 ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Priyanka Dhar, Sr.DR तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21.12.2021 उदघोषणा क琉 तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07.01.2022 VIRTUAL HEARING आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश/ORDER PER DIVA SINGH The present appeal has been filed by the assessee wherein the correctness of the order dated 05.12.2019 of CIT(A)-1 Ludhiana pertaining to 2011-12 assessment year is assailed on the following grounds : 1. That the Worthy Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Ludhiana has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,59,09,400 on account of unexplained investment u/s 69 of the income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That the Appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off. 2. However, at the time of hearing, none was present on behalf of the assessee. The record shows that notice sent to ITA 227 /CHD/2020 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 2 of 7 the assessee at the address mentioned in Form No. 36 has been returned back by the postal authorities with the comment “Refused”. 3. A perusal of the record further shows that in the filing of the present appeal, there is a delay of 297 days pointed out by the Registry. Application and Affidavit explaining the delay is available on record. The contents of the Affidavit read as under: ITA 227 /CHD/2020 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 3 of 7 4. The ld. Sr.DR addressing the factual history submitted that the assessee has repeatedly failed to address the deposits of over Rs. 1.60 Crores before any of the tax authorities. It was highlighted by referring to the record that despite opportunities no explanation let alone an acceptable explanation is forthcoming. Addressing the contents of the affidavit, it was submitted that this would again show the casual approach of the assessee. Accordingly, in the face of these facts, it was her prayer the appeal may be dismissed. Attention was invited to the two Saving Bank accounts as ITA 227 /CHD/2020 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 4 of 7 mentioned in page 3 of the impugned order (No 13901530000949 with HDFC Bank Ludhiana, and another joint S.B. Account No 13901930005155 maintained by the assessee and his wife Smt. Gagandeep Kaur). The deposit of Rs. 1,59,09,400/- was required to be explained, opportunities are provided and for want of any explanation whatsoever, addition was made in the hands of the assessee. Appeal was filed but explanation was not offered. Relying heavily upon the assessment order, it was her submission that more than sufficient opportunity had been granted to the assessee by the AO and the assessee consciously chose not to respond to the queries. The AO after affording many opportunities to the assessee where for lack of explanation to the counsel Shri Pankaj Periwal only sought adjournments and made no compliances whatsoever the addition stood made by an order passed u/s 143(3)/144 of the Act. 5. In appeal before the First Appellate Authority again multiple opportunities, it was submitted, had been given by the CIT(A). Accordingly, on account of the consistent abuse of the opportunities, the addition stood confirmed. In these circumstances, it was her submission that the delay sought to be condoned may be rejected and on merits also, the appeal of the assessee deserves to be dismissed for want of any ITA 227 /CHD/2020 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 5 of 7 explanation. Heavy reliance was placed upon the consistent conduct of the assessee before the tax authorities. 6. We have heard the submissions and perused the material available on record. In the facts of the present case, the conduct of the assessee has been addressed by the CIT(A) in para 2 which reads as under : “2. It has been noted from the impugned order of assessment that despite various opportunities having been,- given to him by the AO to attend the assessment: proceedings and explain the sources of deposits of cash in his bank account, the appellant played hardball and refused to present himself before the Assessing Officers/he AO, thereafter procured the bank statements, from where it was gathered that the appellant had deposited cash amounting to Rs.l,77,21,900/- during the relevant assessment year in his savings bank account maintained with HDFC Bank, Ludhiana as well as in the joint account maintained along with his wife in the said bank. Since the appellant did not come forward to explain the sources of the aforesaid deposits in the bank account in his individual name as also in the joint name with his wife, the AO very reasonably took the peak of the deposits in the two accounts, which came to Rs.1,59,09,400/-. The said amount was, thus, added back to the returned income under the provisions of Section 69 of the Act raising tax and interest demand of Rs. 66,26,520/-. 7. Sufficiency of opportunities afforded and the lack of compliances noticed had been addressed in para 3 of the order. It is also extracted hereunder for completeness: “3. However, when the aforesaid appeal was called out for hearing, the appellant, much like his conduct in the assessment proceedings, kept seeking adjournments on some ground or the other. Reference to the appellate record reveals that numerous opportunities were given to the appellant by way of ITNS-37. It has also been noted that various letters of fixation of the case were served on the appellant through the notice server yet, there was no response. In ITA 227 /CHD/2020 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 6 of 7 the circumstances, the appeal deserves to be d e c i d e d ex-parte without any further reference to the appellant. 8. Considering these facts, the CIT(A) on merits dismissed the appeal holding as under : “4. It has been noted that the appellant had deposited cash in the savings bank account maintained in his own name as also in the joint account maintained along with his wife. The AO very reasonably, took the peak of the aforesaid deposits to make the addition to the returned income in the absence of any explanation regarding the sources of such deposits. No further relief can be accorded to the appellant with regard to the aforesaid deposits. Neither can any fault be found with the action of the AO in taking the peak amount of the deposits in the two bank accounts as unexplained investment under the provisions of section 69 of the Act. It is ordered accordingly.” 9. In the said background the Affidavit sought to explain the delay before the ITAT unsupported by any evidence cannot be blindly accepted. The view is further supported by the fact on record wherein nothing has been pleaded to show why the assessee failed to appear effectively before the AO. The constant abuse of the process of law clearly prohibits this forum to blindly accept the unsupported explanation for delay. We have given our consideration to the merits of the addition also and seen that in the proceedings before us, no effort has been made to address the serious allegation of the CIT(A) who has held as under : ...the appellant played hardball and refused to present himself before the Assessing Officer ...” ITA 227 /CHD/2020 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 7 of 7 9.1 Thus, the contents of paras 2 and 3 of the affidavit ascribing the blame solely to Shri Anil Chawla without evidence cannot be relied upon. In the facts as they stand for the reasons given herein above, not only the Condonation of delay application has no merit but even the appeal of the assessee is found to be devoid of merit as the facts stand. Said order was pronounced at the time of virtual hearing via Webex. 10. Before parting, it is made clear that in the eventuality the assessee is able to address the reasons for non-representation before the ITAT etc. and undertakes to support the contents of the affidavit with evidences and an undertaking that explanation on the merits of the appeal also is available and ready for filing as fresh evidences etc. only in such a bonafide prayer on facts the assessee is granted the liberty to approach the ITAT with a prayer for recall of this order. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on 7 th January,2022. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (DIVA SINGH) लेखा लेखालेखा लेखा सद瀡य सद瀡यसद瀡य सद瀡य/ Accountant Member 瀈याियक 瀈याियक瀈याियक 瀈याियक सद瀡य सद瀡यसद瀡य सद瀡य/ Judicial Member “Poonam” आदेश क琉 灹ितिलिप अ灡ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ牸/ The Appellant 2. 2. 灹瀄यथ牸/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु猴/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु猴 (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय 灹ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च瀃डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड榁 फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar