Mr. Iftikhar Ahmed, Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2625/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 262520114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T VASANTHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: ANI L KUMARCA SHRI MAJDULLAH
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Source of fund

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : C NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO: 2625/DEL/2013 AY : - 2008-09 IFTIKHAR AHMED VS. ITO 27/85, TRILOK PURI WARD 36(4), DELHI-110 091 NEW DELHI. (PAN AHKPA2368J) (APPELLANT) (RES PONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ANI L KUMAR,CA, SHRI MAJDULLAH, CA RESPONDENT BY :SHRI T. VAS ANTHAN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING :18.5.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02- 06-2015 O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE O NLY EFFECTIVE GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS AS UNDER :- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITI ON OF RS. 11,09,000/-, ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT IN APPE LLANTS BANK ACCOUNT, AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THE ADDITION CONFI RMED BY THE CIT(APPEALS), WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND MATERIAL ON RECORD, IS HIGHLY UNJUSTIFIED, CONTRARY TO THE PROV ISION OF LAW AND UNCALLED FOR. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED T HAT THE ASSESSEE WAS LIVING IN A JOINT FAMILY ALONGWITH HIS BROTHERS, SISTERS AND PA RENTS AND MONEY BELONGING TO THE ENTIRE JOINT FAMILY WAS DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE I N HIS BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE ITA NO. 2625/DEL/2013 IFTIKH AR AHMED VS. ITO. 2 WAS HAVING ANCESTRAL FUNDS WHICH WERE ALSO DEPOSITE D IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE HAS FILED A DULY SWORN AFFIDAVIT TO THIS EFFECT. HE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE IS A SMALL RETAIL TRADER AND LIVING ON A P LOT MEASURING 22.5 SQ YARDS IN TRILOKPURI, DELHI ALONG WITH HIS FAMILY AND IS RUNN ING ONLY A SMALL GROCERY SHOP TO EARN HIS LIVELIHOOD. THE CHILDREN WERE STUDYING IN GOVT. SCHOOLS IN TRILOKPURI AND HAS PRACTICALLY NO ASSET EXCEPT THE PLOT MEASURING 22.5 SQ. YARDS IN TRILOKPURI, DELHI AND SHOP OF GROCERY ITEMS AND LIC POLICY OF A VERY SMAL L AMOUNT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE WAS MISHANDLED BY THE REPRESENTATIVE AUTHORISE D BY THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE AO. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITT ED THAT THE ASSESEE HAS NO OTHER ASSET WHATSOEVER AND WAS HARD HIT BY THE CIRCUMSTAN CES. THE LD. DR HAS OPPOSED THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT ONUS WAS ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF FUNDS DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT. HE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND AO. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION S AND HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND CIT(A) AND ALSO THE CONTENTS OF THE AFF IDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT IN SUCH TYPE OF CASES, WHERE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT HAVING PROPER BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OR EVEN ASSISTANCE FROM SOME PROFESSIONAL AND IS HAVING A VERY SMALL GROCERY BUSINESS TO MAKE LIVELIHOOD, INCOME HAS TO BE DETERMINED BY WAY OF ESTIMATE ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THIS CASE THERE IS NO MATERIAL EITHER WITH THE REVENUE OR WITH THE ASSESS EE TO PROVE THEIR CASE BEYOND DOUBT. THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING A JOINT FAMILY AND TH IS FACT COULD NOT BE CONTROVERTED BY THE REVENUE. THE POSSIBILITY OF ASSESSEE INHERIT ING CERTAIN ASSET FROM ANCESTORS, COULD NOT BE RULED OUT. NO OTHER INVESTMENT APART F ROM AS DETAILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS AFFIDAVIT, COULD BE ESTABLISHED BY THE DEPAR TMENT. THE ASSESSEE IS LIVING ON A ITA NO. 2625/DEL/2013 IFTIKH AR AHMED VS. ITO. 3 PLOT MEASURING 22.5 SQ. YARDS WITH HIS FAMILY IN TR ILOKPURI, DELHI. THE INSURANCE PREMIUM PAID BY THE ASSESSEE WAS RS. 532/- AND RS. 420/- QUARTERLY ONLY. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ENDS OF JUSTICE SHALL BE MET IF THE INCOM E OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT YEAR IS ESTIMATED AT RS. 6 LACS BY WAY OF ESTIMATE AS AGAINST RS. 14,73,250/- DETERMINED BY THE AO AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF T HE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 4. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.0 6.2015. SD/- SD/- (T.S. KAPOOR) (G.C. GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDE NT DATED: 02.06.2015 *VEENA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR SL. NO. DESCRIPTION DATE 1. DATE OF DICTATION BY THE AUTHOR 18.5.2015 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 19.5.2015 3. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER ITA NO. 2625/DEL/2013 IFTIKH AR AHMED VS. ITO. 4 4. DRAFT APPROVED BY THE SECOND MEMBER 5. DATE OF APPROVED ORDER COMES TO THE SR. PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER 7. DATE OF FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER