BANSIDHAR ENTERPRISES , HZB V. ITO WD-1(2), HZB

ITA 25/RAN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8297 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NISHA SINGHMARR J
• Assessee Lawyers: M K CHOUDHURY
• Section: 143(3); 133(6)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A NOS.24&25/RAN/2018 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2013-14 & 2014-15 BANSIDHAR ENTERPRISES, MAIN ROAD, CHARHI, HAZARIBAGH- 825336 VS. ITO, WARD-1(2), HAZARIBAGH PAN/GIR NO. : AAIFM1807B ( APPELL ANT ) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI M. K. CHOUDHURY, ADV. RESPONDENT BY SMT. NISHA SINGHMARR, JCIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING 05.03.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 05.03.2020 O R D E R S. S. GODARA(ORAL): THESE ASSESSEES TWO APPEALS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2013-14 & 2014-15 ARISE AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), HAZARIBAG, JHARKHAND BOTH DATED 09.10.2017 PASSED IN CASE NO.10038/HZB/2016-17 & NO.10113/HZB/2016-17 INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. THE ASSESSEES IDENTICAL SOLITARY GRIEVANCE RAISED IN BOTH THESE APPEALS CHALLENGES THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION TREATING BANK DEPOSITS IN CASH MODE TO THE TUNE OF RS.38,91,182/- AND RS.3107310/- ASSESSMENT YEAR WISE; RESPECTIVELY AS UNEXPLAINED. SUFFICE TO SAY, THIS ASSESSEE ADMITTEDLY RUNS A PETROL PUMP. THERE IS FURTHER NO DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE IMPUGNED CASH DEPOSITS IN BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 3. COMING TO ASSESSEES EXPLANATION DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY TILL DATE, IT SOUGHT TO EXPLAIN BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE DEPOSITS REPRESENT CASH DEPOSITS ADVANCE RECEIVED FROM 10 PARTIES IN FORMER AND 23 PARTIES IN LATTER ASSESSMENT YEAR; RESPECTIVELY I.T.A NO.24/RAN/2018 & I.T.A NO.25/RAN/2018 BANSIDHAR ENTERPRISES 2 INVOLVING VARYING SUMS OF MONEY. CASE FILE SUGGESTS THAT THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO HAVE ADJUSTED THE SAID ALLEGED ADVANCES AGAINST SALE BILLS IN CASE OF THE VERY PARTIES WHO HAD RESPONDED TO SECTION 133(6) NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES CASE IN LIGHT OF BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES FINDINGS IS THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT DISCHARGE HIS BURDEN FOR PROVING GENUINENESS, CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE SAID 33 PARTIES INVOLVED IN THESE TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS. I FAIL TO AGREE WITH THE REVENUES INSTANT ARGUMENTS IN ENTIRETY. MORE SO WHEN THE ASSESSEES SOLE RECEIPT IN CASE OF THE VERY 33 PARTIES IN NATURE OF ADJUSTMENT MADE AGAINST ADVANCES HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSELF. THE FACT ALSO REMAINS THAT MERE SUCH AN ACCEPTANCE ON TECHNICAL SIDE DOES NOT AMOUNT TO THE ASSESSEE HAVING PROVED ITS CASE BY WAY OF COGENT EXPLANATION. I KEEP IN MIND ALL THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND DEEM IT APPROPRIATE THAT LARGER INTEREST OF JUSTICE WOULD BE MET IN CASE THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS ARE SUSTAINED TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2.5 LAKHS EACH (WITHOUT TELESCOPING) IN THE TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS. I ORDER ACCORDINGLY. NECESSARY COMPUTATION INCLUDING THAT OF INTEREST, IF ANY, SHALL FOLLOW AS PER LAW. 3. THIS ASSESSEES TWO APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED IN ABOVE TERMS. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.03.2020. SD/- (S. S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 05.03.2020. RS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) - 5. THE DR, ITAT, RANCHI 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SR. P.S., ITAT, RANCHI (ON TOUR)