Sh. Suyash Kumar Agarwal, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2336/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 233620114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 30-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P D TAN EJA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC -2, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I.C.SUDHIR, JM ITA NO. 2336/DEL./2014 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 SUYASH KUMAR AGARWAL S/O. SH. SUNIL GARODIA, C-46 PAMPOSH ENCLAVE, 1 ST FLOOR NEW DELHI VS I.T.O. WARD-23(2) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AHIPA8308C APPELLANT BY : SH .SANDEEP SAPRA , ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SH. P.D.TAN EJA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 30.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :31 .07.2015 ORDER PER I.C.SUDHIR, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.02.2014 OF THE LD. C.I.T.(A)-XI, NEW DELHI. 2. THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER HAS BEEN QUESTIONED B Y THE ASSESSEE MAINLY ON THE GROUND OF VALIDITY OF ADDITI ON OF RS. 10,60,020/- UPHELD BY THE LD. CIT(A). 3. HEARD AND CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED B Y THE PARTIES IN VIEW OF THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BE LOW, MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THE DECISIONS RELI ED UPON. ITA NO.2336/DEL/2014 2 4. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT DURING THE YEAR T HE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN INCOME FROM BUSINESS AND HOUSE PROPERTY A ND THE RETURN OF RS. 1,17,480/- WAS PROCESSED U/S 143( 1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSMENT WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ON THE BASIS OF AIR INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE H AD DEPOSITED RS. 10,60,020/- IN HIS SAVINGS BANK ACCOU NT MAINTAINED WITH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK. BEING NOT SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE ADDED INCOME OF RS. 10,60,020/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT B ESIDES THE ADDITION OF RS. 44,485/- ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME F ROM OTHER SOURCES. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS UPHELD THE ADDITI ON OF RS. 10,60,020/- WHICH HAS BEEN QUESTIONED BY THE ASSESS EE. 5. IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUND THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AR REMANDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINE SS OF USED GARMENTS ON RETAIL BASIS AND THE PAYMENTS ARE MOSTLY RECEIVED IN CASH. PARTIES ARE FROM OUT STATION AND THE AGENT WHO GOES TO KOLKATA TO COLLECT THE PAYMENT, DEPOSIT S THE SAME IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, WH ATEVER PAYMENT IS RECEIVED. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL DE POSIT IN THE BANK IN CASH WERE RS. 9,35,480/- AS AGAINST RS. 10,60,020/- AS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. T HESE CASH DEPOSITS REPRESENT SALE PROCEEDS OF THE TRADE, DEPOSIT OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWALS AND BEING SALE, THE SAME HA S BEEN ITA NO.2336/DEL/2014 3 ALREADY CONSIDERED WHILE DECLARING INCOME FROM RETA IL BUSINESS AT RS. 1,26,839/-. THE LD. AR REFERRED PAG E NOS. 6 TO 16 AND 17 TO 19 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH ARE COPI ES OF ASSESSEES BANK STATEMENT OF STANDARD CHARTERED BAN K FOR THE YEAR AND DETAILS OF CASH WITHDRAWALS / CASH DEPOSIT S IN THE ACCOUNT. HE SUBMITTED THAT WITHDRAWALS SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED WHILE MAKING THE ADDITION AND THEORY OF TELESCOPING SHOULD ALSO HAVE BEEN APPLIED. HE CITED FOLLOWING DECISIONS IN SUPPORT: (1) MANBEER VS. IT O, ITA NO. 4917/DEL./2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10) ORDER DATED 19.6.2014. (2) MOONGIPA INVESTMENT LTD. VS. ITO, IT A NO. 2605/DEL./2007(2003-04) ORDER DATED 5.8.2011, (3) S.R.VENKATA RATNAM VS. CIT 127 ITR 807 (KARN.) 6. LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND PLACED RELIANCE ON T HE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 7. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE CITE D DECISIONS, I AGREE WITH THE LD. AR THAT THE WITHDRAWALS WHICH WE RE RE- DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONS IDERED BY THE AO AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE DEPOSITS SHOU LD NOT HAVE BEEN TREATED AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCE S. I THUS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE DEEM IT FIT TO SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR MAKING PROPER VERIF ICATION AND IF IT IS FOUND THAT THE WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.2336/DEL/2014 4 WERE RE-DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, THEN TELESCO PING EFFECT BE GIVEN TO THOSE WITHDRAWALS WHILE CONSIDER ING THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND IF THE NET DEPOSIT S REMAINED UN-EXPLAINED THEN ONLY THE AO IS TO MAKE T HE ADDITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING OPP ORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUND IS THUS, ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. IN RESULT APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE S. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 31/07/2015). SD/- (I.C.SUDHIR) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 31/ 07/2015 *B.RUKHAIYAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITA NO.2336/DEL/2014 5 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 22.07.2015 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 23.07.2015 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.