Smt. Ashaben Nileshkumar Gupta, Bhavnagar V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Bhavnagar

ITA 2600/AHD/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6457 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-04-2010
• Assessment Year: 2000-2001
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2005
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJA RAM SHAH
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND N. S. SAINI, AM) ITA NO.2600/AHD/2005 A. Y: 2000-01 SMT. ASHABEN NILESHKUMAR GUPTA, RADHAKRISHNA 12/A, ANJNESHWAR PARK, TILAKNAGAR, BHAVNAGAR, PA NO. AEEPG 6386 E VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), BHAVNAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI DHIREN SHAH, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI RAJA RAM SHAH, DR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XIX, AHMEDABAD DATED 10 -10-2005 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOT H THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND C ONSIDERED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRE SS GROUNDS NO.1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 AND 8. ALL THESE GROUNDS ARE DISMISSE D BEING NOT PRESSED. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RESTRICTED HIS ARGUMENTS TO GROUND NO.4 ONLY WHICH READS AS UNDER: 4. HE HAS ALSO ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE FOLLOWING B ANK FIXED DEPOSIT/DEPOSIT IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT AS DETAILED BELOW AS UNEXPLAINED WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACTS . (I) RS.2,000/- IN A/C. NO.11562 MAINTAINED WITH BAN K OF BARODA, JAMNAGAR. ITA NO.2600/AHD/2005 SMT. ASHABEN NILSESHKUMAR GUPTA 2 (II) RS.20,000/- IN A/C. NO. 9511 MAINTAINED WITH S TATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA, RAJKOT. (III) RS.11,000/- DEPOSITED IN A/C. NO.11517 MAINTA INED WITH CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, JAMNAGAR. 4. ON GROUND NO.4 (I) AND 4(III) OF THE APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO THE FI NDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHEREBY THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADD ITIONS OF RS.2,000/- AND RS.11,000/- ON THE REASONS THAT THE DEPOSIT OF RS.2,000/- AND RS.11,000/- REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AND IS ALSO NOT SU PPORTED THROUGH ANY ACCUMULATED BALANCES. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED INCOME IN THE RETURN OF INCOME EARNED ON ACCOUNT OF TUITION WHICH IS ACCEPTED BY T HE AO IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE IS A CENTRAL GOVERNMEN T EMPLOYEE AND HAS ALSO SOURCE OF INCOME. THEREFORE, ADDITION OF RS.2, 000/- AND RS.11,000/- IS CLEARLY UNJUSTIFIED BEING THE ASSESSEE HAS KNOWN SOURCE OF INCOME WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONS M AY BE DELETED. ON GROUND NO.4( II) OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GIVE N SPECIFIC FINDINGS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE DEPOSIT OF RS.20,000/- I N THE BANK AND HAS GOT PREPARED FDR OF RS.20,000/- BY CHEQUES NO. 681 ON 08-08-1998. HE HAS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE AFORESAID AMOUNT DEPOSITED IS OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL I.E . 2000-01. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IF THE AMOUNT OF RS.20,000/- DE POSITED ON 08-08-1998 REMAINED UNEXPLAINED, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. ON THE OTHER HAND, TH E LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ADDITIONS ARE CLEARLY UNJUSTIFIED AND ARE LIABL E TO BE DELETED. AS ITA NO.2600/AHD/2005 SMT. ASHABEN NILSESHKUMAR GUPTA 3 REGARDS ADDITION OF RS.2,000/- AND RS.11,000/- BEIN G THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BY THE ASSESSEE, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS JUSTIFIED IN CONTENDING THAT SINCE SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTED BY THE AO IN A SUM OF RS.54,00 0/- IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME WHICH IS ALSO DISCLOSED IN TH E RETURN OF INCOME, THEREFORE, THE SOURCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS EXPLAINED TO THAT EXTENT. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE H USBAND OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO WORKING BEING GOVERNMENT SERVANT. EVEN IF SOME SMALL AMOUNTS ARE WITHDRAWN FOR THE PURPOSE OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AT LEAST RS.2,000/- AND RS.11,000/- IS AVAILABLE TO THE ASSE SSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE AMOUNT O F RS.2,000/- AND RS.11,000/- IS VERY SMALL AS AGAINST THE INCOME DEC LARED IN A SUM OF RS.54,000/- IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. THEREFORE, ABOVE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF TH E ASSESSEE CANNOT BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT. BOTH THE ADDITIONS ARE, THEREFORE, LIABLE TO BE DELETED. AS REGARDS ADDITION OF RS.20,000/- I S CONCERNED, THE AO HAS NOT GIVEN ANY DATE OF DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOU NT. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS HOWEVER, SPECIFICALLY NOTED THAT THE FDR WAS PR EPARED ON 08-08-1998 WHICH REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AND ACCORDING LY THE ADDITION WAS CONFIRMED. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO THAT THERE IS A CREDIT ENTRY IN JULY, 1998 THROUGH WHICH THE FDR WA S PREPARED. IF ALL THE ABOVE DATES ARE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION IT WOULD P ROVE THAT THE ADDITION IS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF FDR OF RS.20,000/- DATED 08- 08-1998 REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. SUCH DATE OF DEPOSIT AND ISSUE OF FDR WOULD FALL IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1999-2000 AND AS SUCH NO ADDITION C AN BE MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL I.E. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 000-01. THE ADDITION IS, THEREFORE, LIABLE O BE DELETED. WE ACC ORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DELETE THE ENTI RE ADDITIONS ON GROUND NO. 4(I) (II) AND (III) OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ITA NO.2600/AHD/2005 SMT. ASHABEN NILSESHKUMAR GUPTA 4 7. WE MAY ALSO NOTE HERE THAT ON GROUND NO.4 (III) OF THE APPEAL THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS THE ISSUE RELATING TO ADDITION OF RS.10,000/- BECAUSE THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN ANY FINDING ON THE SAME. 8. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTL Y ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 23-04-2010 SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 23- 04-2010 LAKSHMIKANT/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD