Smt. Rekhaben P. Mittal, Baroda V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 8(4), Baroda

ITA 2438/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 94602 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 01-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 11-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Salary income
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENC H (BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO: 2438/AHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) SMT. REKHABEN P. MITTAL 33, DEVIDAYAL SALES LTD. ALKAPURI, BARODA-3994220 V/S INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 8 (4), BARODA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AAPPT0319Q APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUNIL TALATI, AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SOMOGYAN PAL, SR. D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 01-10-201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16 -10-2015 PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE OR DER OF CIT(A)-VI, BARODA DATED 27.08.2013 FOR A.Y. 2008-09. ITA NO 2438/ AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2008-0 9 2 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER. 3. ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL HAVING INCOME FROM SALARY AND OTHER SOURCES. ASSESSEE FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2008-09 ON 27.6.2008 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS 1,41,790/-. THE CASE W AS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THEREAFTER ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) VID E ORDER DATED 23.12.2010 AND THE TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT T HE RS 2,01,970/- BY INTER ALIA MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 60,000/- U/S 68. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD.CIT(A) WHO VIDE ORDER DATED 27.8.2013 UPHELD THE ORDER OF A.O AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS N OW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE CIT-VI IS BAD IN LA W AND BE QUASHED. IT BE HELD SO NOW AND THE ADDITIONS MADE BY HON'BLE CIT-VI, BAROD A BE DELETED. 2. THE HON'BLE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADD ITION OF RS 60,000/-BEING CASH DEPOSITED WITH ICICI/HDFC BANK, WITHOUT APPRECIATIN G THE FACT THAT THE CASH BALANCE WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE APPELLANT ON THE DATES OF DE POSITS. THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION ON THE FLIMSY GROUND THAT TH E APPELLANT HAD NOT FILED THE BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ALONG WIT H THE RETURN OF INCOME, WHICH IS NOT MANDATORY AS PER THE ACT. THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HA S FAILED TO POINT OUT ANY DISCREPANCY/MISTAKE FROM THE COPY OF ACCOUNTS FILED AND IN TURN REJECTED THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT. THE ACTION OF T HE HON'BLE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS BASED ON PRESUMPTION. ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITION CONF IRMED BY CIT(A) IS UNJUST AND UNWARRANTED AND SAME BE DELETED NOW. 4. BEFORE US, LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY ISSUE I S WITH RESPECT TO ADDITION U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. ITA NO 2438/ AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2008-0 9 3 5. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, AO ON PERUSING THE BANK ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE, NOTICED THAT A SSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED RS. 40,000/- ON 17.8.2007 IN HER HDFC ACCOUNT AND RS 20,000/- ON 7.2.2008 IN HER ICICI BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE WA S ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE TO WHICH ASSESSEE INTER ALIA EXPLAINED THE S OURCE TO BE FROM HER PAST DEPOSITS. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT F OUND ACCEPTABLE TO A.O AND THEREFORE HE CONSIDERED THE AGGREGATE DEPOSITS OF RS. 60,000/- TO BE AN UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND ACCORDINGLY MADE ADDITI ON OF RS 60,000/-. THE ORDER OF A.O WAS UPHELD BY LD CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DAT ED 27.8.2013 BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 6 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ALSO THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS A FACT THAT THE APPELLAN T HAS BEEN REGULARLY FILING HER RETURN OF INCOME FOR LAST MANY YEARS, BUT IT IS ALSO A FACT T HAT THE BALANCE SHEET AND THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT, CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED BY THE APP ELLANT, WERE NEVER FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURNS OF INCOME FILED. IT IS FOR THE FIRST TI ME BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE APPELLANT PRODUCED A CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND A BALANCE SHEET AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER RIGHTLY DID NOT GIVE ANY CREDENCE TO THE SA ME. EVEN A STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS RELATING TO THE APPELLANT WAS NEVER FILED SUO-MOTO BEFORE TH E INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES. THE APPELLANT'S ONLY DEFENCE FOR JUSTIFYING THE CASH CR EDITS IS THE SO CALLED CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET, TO WHICH NO CREDENCE CAN BE GIVEN, A S IT IS AN AFTER-THOUGHT. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON TH E ABOVE ISSUE DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY INTERFERENCE AND HENCE, IS CONFIRMED. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS N OW BEFORE US. 7. BEFORE US, THE LD AR APART FROM REITERATING THE SU BMISSIONS MADE BEFORE AO AND LD. CIT(A) FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CASH D EPOSITS TO BE OUT OF ACCUMULATED SAVINGS AND THAT ASSESSEE IS REGULARLY FILING HER RETURN OF ITA NO 2438/ AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2008-0 9 4 INCOME AND IS ASSESSED TO TAX. HE PLACED ON RECORD THE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGED RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y 2005-06 TO A. Y 2008-09 AND POINTED TO THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND OTHER DOCU MENTS THAT WERE FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME. HE THEREFORE SUBMI TTED THAT CONSIDERING THE AFORESAID FACTS, THE DEPOSIT OF CASH IS FULLY EXPLA INED AND THEREFORE CALLS FOR NO ADDITION. THE LD DR ON THE OTHER HAND RELIED ON THE ORDER OF A.O AND LD. CIT(A). 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE WE FIND THAT AO HAD MADE THE ADDIT ION OF RS 60,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WHICH HAS BEEN TREATED BY THE AO AS UNEXPLAINED. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT AS SESSEE IS AN INCOME TAX ASSESSEE AND HAS FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME. THE RE TURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y 2005-06 AND A.Y 2006-07 REVEALS THAT ASSESSEE HAS D ECLARED TAXABLE INCOME OF RS 2,62,226/- AND RS 1,39,117/- FOR A.Y 2005-06 AND 2006-07 RESPECTIVELY AND WHICH HAVE ALSO NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE. IN SUCH A SITUATION THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DEPOSITS TO BE OUT OF ACCUMULATED SAVINGS CANNOT BE DOUBTED MORE SO WHEN NO CONTRARY MATERIAL HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD BY THE REVENUE TO DEMONST RATE THAT THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT CORRECT. CONSIDE RING THE TOTALITY OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE PRE SENT CASE NO ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IS CALLED FOR. WE THEREFORE DIRECT THE DELETION OF ADDITION MADE BY A.O. THUS THE GROUND O F ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ITA NO 2438/ AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2008-0 9 5 9. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 16 - 1 0 - 2015 . SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,A HMEDABAD