Ranjeeth Damanprakash Rathod, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 2361/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4762 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 09-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 17-08-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO. 2 3 6 1 /MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 1 1 - 1 2 S HRI RANJEETH DAMANPRAKASH RATHOD, NO. 7, NEW NO. 11, NANA STREET, T. NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 0 17 . [PAN: A AFPK0603G ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , NON - CORPORATE WARD 2 ( 3 ) , CHENNAI 34 . ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : S HRI S HIVA SRINIVAS , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 0 9 . 02 .201 7 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 26 . 04 .201 7 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : TH I S APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 2 , CHENNAI DATED 3 0 . 0 6 .201 6 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 1 - 1 2 . THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRED IN CONFIRM ING THE ADDITION OF .19,10,000/ - BEING THE CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 2 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF . 4,74,120/ - . THE CASE OF THE I.T.A. NO . 2 36 1 / M/ 1 6 2 ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY . NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 [ ACT IN S HORT] WAS ISSUED ON 2 9 .09.201 2 AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAME DATE . NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 29.08.2013. BASED ON THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND AFTER VERIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE A SSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT BY ASSESSING TOTAL INCOME AT .22,18,090/ - . 2.1 IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FOUND THAT THERE WAS A CASH DEPOSIT OF . 1 9,10,000/ - ON 19.02.2011 INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH AXIS BANK, T. NAGAR BRANCH. WHEN THE SOURCE FOR THE CASH DEPOSIT WAS CALLED FOR BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT HE HAS MADE CASH SALES OF 1 KG OF GOLD BAR AND DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT IN THE BANK. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT SATISFIED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED BACK THE AMOUNT OF . 19,10,000/ - TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH HIS CLAIM THROUGH PRODUCTION OF DETAILS SUCH AS NAME AND ADDRESS AND OTHER DETAILS OF PURCHASES AND ALSO AS THERE WAS A LONG GAP OF FIVE MONTHS BETWEEN THE ALLEGED DATE OF SALE OF GOLD (I.E. 06.09.2010) AND THE DATE OF THE CASH DEPOSIT (19.02.2011). 3. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). AS THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE DETAILS OF NAME AND ADDRESS AND OTHER I.T.A. NO . 2 36 1 / M/ 1 6 3 DET AILS OF PURCHASES AND OFFERED SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION WITH REGARD TO THE LONG GAP OF FIVE MONTHS BETWEEN THE ALLEGED DATE OF SALE OF GOLD AND THE DATE OF THE CASH DEPOSIT , THE LD. CIT(A), CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW ALONG WITH PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY DETAILS OF THE PURCHASES. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT DESPITE THE FACT THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBMIT THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PURCHASER, THE ASSE SSEE FAILED TO FURNISH THOSE DETAILS AND THUS, THE ASSESSEE FAIL TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS CAST UPON HIM. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN ADDING THE SAID AMOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, BY F ILING THE DETAILS OF NAME AND ADDRESS, PAN NUMBER OF PURCHASERS AND BANK STATEMENTS, ETC. IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PRAYED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO FILE ALL THE ABOVE DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH. I.T.A. NO . 2 36 1 / M/ 1 6 4 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO FILE THE ABOVE DETAILS BEF ORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION. THUS, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE DETAILS AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER ALLOWING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HE ARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FILE ALL THE DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT FAIL. THUS, THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 26 TH APRIL , 201 7 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 26. 0 4 .201 7 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.