SUNITA AGARWAL, CUTTACK V. ITO, WARD-1(1),CUTTACK, CUTTACK

ITA 256/CTK/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0483 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE Sunita Agarwal Advertisers, Jobra Road, College Square, Cuttack PAN/GIR No (Appellant This is an appeal filed by the assessee aga Addl/JCIT(A)-9, Mumbai No.CIT(A),Cuttack/10163/2018 2. Shri Mohit Sheth, S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR 3. The assessee has filed written submissio IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Sunita Agarwal, C/O. Ajanta Advertisers, Jobra Road, College Square, Cuttack Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Cuttack PAN/GIR No.AJFPA 9375 E (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Mohit Sheth, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 5/08 Date of Pronouncement : 5/0 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld 9, Mumbai dated 17.5.2024 ,Cuttack/10163/2018-19 for the assessment year Mohit Sheth, ld AR appeared for the assessee. Shri , ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the revenue. ssessee has filed written submission, as follow Page1 | 9 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, , CUTTACK JUDICIAL MEMBER Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(1), Cuttack Respondent) Mohit Sheth, Adv , ld Sr DR 8/2024 /08/2024 inst the order of the ld 17.5.2024 in Appeal for the assessment year 2016-17. the assessee. Shri represented on behalf of the revenue. , as follow: ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page2 | 9 ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page3 | 9 4. ld AR has also filed balance sheet of the four purchasers as follows: ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page4 | 9 ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page5 | 9 ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page6 | 9 ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page7 | 9 5. It was the submission that the assessee alongwith four co-owners has purchased the property for Rs.1,71,60,080/- which included cost of the property as also the registration charges of Rs.11,60,080/- . It was the submission that the Assessing Officer, in the course of assessment proceedings, held that there is no debit transaction of Rs.11,60,080/- in the account of any of the four purchasers maintained singly or jointly for ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page8 | 9 payment of stamp duty and consequently held that Rs.11,60,080/- paid by Shri Manish Agarwal remained unexplained. The Assessing Officer, consequently turn around and made the addition in the hands of the assessee, being Smt. Sunita Agarwal. It was the submission that the cost of the property including the registration charges of Rs.1,71,16,080/- , each of the purchaser had disclosed equal share of Rs.42,90,020/- in their balance sheet. It was the submission that the balance sheet and bank account of each of the co-owners had been produced before the Assessing Officer and the same is also recognized in para 3.3 of the assessment order. It was the submission that when entire amount had been disclosed, no addition in the hands of Smt. Sunita Agarwal, the assessee was called for insofar as the entire investment has been disclosed in her books in respect of her share. It was the submission that this amount of Rs.11,60,080/- representing the stamp duty and registration charges was paid in cash by each of four co-owners. It was the submission that the amount had been withdrawn from their bank account. 6. In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer and ld CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee has not produced the evidence before the ld CIT(A). 7. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the balance sheet of four co-owners clearly shows that the amount of Rs.42,90,020/- has been clearly disclosed in the balance sheet as on 31.3.2016. A perusal ITA No.256/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page9 | 9 of the assessment order at page 3 para 3.3 shows that the Assessing Officer has questioned the transaction in respect of Manish Agrawal but has turn around and made the addition in the hands of the assessee being Sunita Agarwal. The fact that four co-owners have disclosed the transaction in their balance sheet and the fact that the assessee do have adequate funds for making this investment and the assessee has also explained the source of the said funds for making the investment, the addition as made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) stands deleted. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 5/08/2024. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 5/08/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Sunita Agarwal, C/O. Ajanta Advertisers, Jobra Road, College Square, Cuttack 2. The Respondent: Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(1), Cuttack 3. The Addl/JCIT(A)- 9, Mumbai 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//