Shri Sunil H.Shah,HUF, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-7(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 2747/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1885 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEETA SHAH
• Assessee Lawyers: KIRITKUMAR C THAKKAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE DR. O. K. NARAYANAN, VP AND SHRI BHAVNESH S AINI, JM) ITA NOS.2747/AHD/2009 A. Y.: 200506 SHRI SUNIL H. SHAH, H. U. F., 17, KASTURI COMPLEX, OPP. ATITHI DINING HALL, JUDGES BUNGLOW ROAD, BODAKDEV, AHMEDABAD PA NO. AAF HS 6492 - H VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(1), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI KIRITKUMAR C. THAKKAR, AR RESPONDENT BY SMT. NEETA SHAH, DR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XI, AHMEDABAD DATED 04-03-2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, CHALLENGING THE ADDITION O F RS.62,000/-. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOT H THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. THE AO MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.1,11,000/- IN RES PECT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASS ESSEE ON DIFFERENT DATES. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED ADDITION OF RS.49,00 0/- AND RS. 13,000/- TOTALING TO RS. 62,000/- IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARN ED CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT OF AGRICULT URE INCOME. THE LEARNED CIT(A) NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED T O PRODUCE BILLS OF AGRICULTURE INCOME IN WHICH ALSO THERE IS A DIFFERE NCE OF THE YEAR LIKE 2004 OR 2007. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY DISMIS SED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NOS.2747/AHD/2009 SUNIL H. SHAH, HUF 2 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ADDITION IS CLEARLY UNJUSTIFIED. T HE AO NOTED THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN AGRICU LTURE INCOME OF RS.1,07,070/- FOR RATE PURPOSE. IT WOULD SHOW THAT AGRICULTURE INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT DISPUTED BY THE AO. EV EN IF, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE ANY BILL OF THE AGRICULTURE INCOME BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EARNING AGRIC ULTURE INCOME IN A SUM OF RS.1,07,070/- IS NOT DISPUTED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE SAID SUM IS, THEREFORE, AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE TH E DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ON TWO OCCASIONS. CONSIDERING THIS ASPECT, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO SUSTAIN THE ADDITION OF SMALL AMOU NT OF RS.62,000/- AND DELETE THE SAME. 5. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10-12-2009 SD/- SD/- (DR. O. K. NARAYANAN) VICE PRESIDENT (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 10-12-2009 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