Sh. Pankaj Mittal, Agra V. I.T.O.4(3), Agra

ITA 228/AGR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 22820314 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 01-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K SHARMA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 234B; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, SMC, AGRA BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.228/AGR/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02 SHRI PANKAJ MITTAL, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 4(3), B-61, BHAGWAN NAGAR, AGRA. BALKESHWAR, AGRA. (PAN: ADOPM 2537 R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI AJAY JAIN, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.K. SHARMA, JR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 01.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.11.2011 ORDER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST T HE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01.03.2011 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-II, DEHRADUN (C AMP: AGRA) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- ASSESSEE BORROWED AMOUNT OF ` 1,00,000/- DATED 29.05.2000 BY CHEQUE NO.591049 FROM AMIT AGRAWAL & COMPANY ON INTEREST. FURTHER THIS BORROWED AMOUNT WAS REPAID BY THE ASSE SSEE DATED ON 26.04.2002 BY CHEQUE NO.738327 AMOUNTING ` 1,23,200/- WHICH INCLUDE ` 1,00,000/- PRINCIPAL AMOUNT AND ` 23,200/- INTEREST AMOUNT. THEREFORE IN ANY VIEW OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDI TION ` 1,00,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 IS NOT CORRECT. AS THE IDENTITY AND GENUINENESS OF LOAN OF ` 1,00,000/- BORROWED FROM AMIT AGRAWAL & COMPANY RECEIVED BY CHEQUE IS F ULLY PROVED ITA NO.228/AGR/2011 A.Y. 2001-02 2 WITH THE DOCUMENTS AND EVIDENCE OF LOAN RECEIVED AN D LOAN REPAID ALREADY FURNISHED. THEREFORE THE LOAN AMOUNT TAKEN FROM AMIT AGRAWAL & COMPANY HAVING BEEN SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED AND ON MERE PRESUMPTION ADDITION MADE IS NOT CORRECT. ASSESSME NT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3)/147 BY MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADDITION U/S 68 OF ` 1,00,000/- IS NOT CORRECT. FURTHER ADDITION OF INTEREST PAID/ PAYABLE ON ABOVE BORROWED AMOUNT OF THE CONCERNED A.Y. ` 12,625/- IS ALSO NOT CORRECT. THEREFORE INCOME TAX DEMAND OF ` 32,772/- PLUS INTEREST AMOUNT U/S 234B OF ` 21,827/- DUE TO ABOVE ADDITION IS ALSO NOT CORRECT. IN THE FOLLOWING CASES IN SIMILAR FACTS OF THE AMOUNT RECE IVED FROM SO CALLED GANGARAM GROUP THE LD. CIT(A)/HONBLE I.T.A.T./HON BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS :- (I) A. NO. CIT(A)-II/AGRA/96/ITO-4(3)/AGR/08-09/DAT E OF ORDER : 05/10/2010 SHRI RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL, HUF (COPY ENCLOSED) (B-3 TO B-7). (II) ITA NO.614/CIT(A)-I ADITYA AGARWAL, AGRA. T HE HONBLE I.T.A.T. DISMISSED THE DEPARTMENT APPEAL IN CASE OF ADITYA AGARWAL VIDE I.T.A. NO.262/AG/2006. THE HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT DISMISSED THE DEPARTME NT APPEAL IN CASE OF ADITYA AGARWAL VIDE I.T.A. NO.524/AGR/2007. (B-8 TO B-16). (III) ITA NO.75/CIT(A)-I - M/S GAURAV DISTRIBUTORS, AGRA DATED 08/07/2010 (B-17 TO B-20). (IV) ITA NO.70/CIT(A)-II - M/S JAIN COLLECTION, AGR A (B-21 TO B-31). (V) ITA NO.56/CIT(A)-II - M/S NAND KISHORE & SONS, AGRA (B-32 TO B-36). WITH THE ABOVE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS IT IS REQUESTE D TO YOUR HONOUR TO DO JUSTICE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.228/AGR/2011 A.Y. 2001-02 3 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT DISPU TED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, THEREFORE, NO NEED TO REPEAT THE SAME FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF TH E ASSESSEE BY THIS BENCH IN ITA NO.262/AGR/2006 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 IN THE CASE OF I.T.O. VS. ADITYA AGARWAL WHICH HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE HONBLE JURISD ICTIONAL HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 04.08.2010 IN CASE NO.524 OF 2007 FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ADITYA AGARWAL. HE STATED THAT KEEPING IN VIEW THE SAID DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ALLOWED. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTA TIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RE LEVANT RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH ME. I AM OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THIS BENCH IN ITA NO.262/AGR/2006 IN THE CASE OF ADITYA AGARWAL AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST I.T.A.T. ORDER HAS ALSO BEEN DISMISSED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTION HIGH COURT. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER DATED 04.08.2010 O F THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL ITA NO.228/AGR/2011 A.Y. 2001-02 4 HIGH COURT IN CASE NO.524 OF 2007 IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. ADITYA AGARWAL, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01.11.2011). SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 1 ST NOVEMBER, 2011 PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT CONCERNED/CIT(APPEALS) CO NCERNED/D.R., ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA/GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY