Mr. T. Damodaran, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 2923/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7945 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 30-01-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K.N.DHANDAPANI
• Assessee Lawyers: S.P.PALANIAPPAN
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 32; 147; 131; 68; 246; 69; 145; 27; 148; 54; 37; 6; 56; 263; 63; 132; 12; 28; 144; 10; 90; 154; 2; 11; 15; 271(1)(b); 139; 92

Judgement Text

, C/ SMC , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C/SMC BENCH, CHENNAI . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.2923 /MDS./2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2011-12) MR.T.DAMODARAN , 19/38, SOUTH KAVARAI STREET, WEST MAMBALAM,CHENNAI-33. VS. THE ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD 21(1), CHENNAI-34. PAN AAIPD 0329 F ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) ! ' # / APPELLANT BY : MR.S.P.PALANIAPPAN,C.A $% ! ' # / RESPONDENT BY : MR.K.N.DHANDAPANI, JCIT,D.R & ' ' ( ) / DATE OF HEARING : 30.01.2017 *+ ' ( ) /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.02.2017 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGGRIEVED B Y THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-9, CHENNA I DATED 18.01.2016 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011- 12 . 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO SUSTAINING THE ADDITION MADE U/S.68 OF THE ACT. ITA NO. 2923/MDS/2016 2 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOLD A PROPERTY SITUATED AT SRINIVASA NAGAR, PUZHUTHIVAKKAM,CHENNAI -91 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF ` 40 LAKHS. FOR CLAIMING EXEMPTION U/S.54F OF THE ACT , THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED A PROPERTY AT SOUTH KAVA RAI STREET, WEST MAMBALAM, CHENNAI-33 FOR A CONSIDERATION OF ` 25/- LAKHS AND RENOVATED THE HOUSE BY SPENDING AN AMOUNT OF ` 16,15,240/-. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE CASH DEPOSIT OF ` 15,94,200/-. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED AS FOLLOWS:- OPENING BALANCE 2,39,580 CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM CANARA BANK A/C 5,73,800 CASH RECEIVED FROM ASSESSEES FATHER-IN-LAW 3,00,000 CASH RECEIVED FROM ASSESSEES BROTHER-IN-LAW 2,00,000 ACCUMULATED SAVINGS RECEIVED FROM ASSESSEES WIFE 3,00,000 16,13,380 ACCORDING TO THE AO, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF ` 15,93,200/-. ACCORDINGLY, HE MADE AN ADDITION OF ` 15,93,200/- U/S.68 OF THE ACT. AGAINST THE ORDER O F LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). ON APPEAL, LD.CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT AN AMOUNT OF ` 5,73,800/- WAS WITHDRAWAL FROM CANARA BANK UP TO THE PERIOD OF 11. 02.2011 AND ITA NO. 2923/MDS/2016 3 LD.CIT(A) HAD GIVEN CREDIT TO THE SAME. HOWEVER, THE BALANCE ADDITIONS ARE SUSTAINED. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD.A.R SUBMITTED T HAT THE AMOUNT OF ` 3 LAKHS GIVEN BY ASSESSEES FATHER IN LAW,2 LAKHS FROM HIS BROTHER IN LAW AND ` 3 LAKHS GIVEN BY ASSESSEES WIFE AND THERE WAS ALS O AN OPENING BALANCE OF ` 2,39,580/-. LD.A.R PLEADED THAT DUE CREDIT TO BE GIVEN TOWARDS THESE AMOUNTS. IN OUR OPINION, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FILED THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM THE CREDITORS B EFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO EXPLAIN THE IR CAPACITY TO ADVANCE THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE BY PLACING THE NEC ESSARY EVIDENCE REGARDING THEIR SOURCE OF INCOME WITH SUPP ORTING DOCUMENTS. EVEN WITH REGARD TO AVAILABILITY OF OPE NING BALANCE ALSO, ` 2,39,580/-, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED EARLIER YE ARS STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS/BALANCE SHEET OF ASSESSEE TO DEMONSTRATE TH E AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS, WHICH WAS CARRIED FORWARDED FROM THE EARLIER YEARS. IN VIEW OF THIS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESS EE TO PLACE ITA NO. 2923/MDS/2016 4 NECESSARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM OF ASSES SEE. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REMIT THE ENTIRE ISS UE IN DISPUTE TO THE FILE OF AO FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION WITH A DIRECTION TO T HE ASSESSEE TO PLACE NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE AO. FURTHER, WE ALSO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WHAT ARE THE STATEMENTS RELIED BY THE AO FOR F RAMING THE ASSESSMENT, A COPY OF THE SAME TO BE FURNISHED TO T HE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSEES COMMENTS BEFORE FRAMING OF ASSESSMENT O RDER. WITH THIS DIRECTION, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LOWER AUTHORIT IES AND REMIT THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 2 ND FEBRUARY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 02 ND FEBRUARY, 2017 . K S SUNDARAM. , ' $(-. /.( / COPY TO: 1 . ! / APPELLANT 3. & 0( () / CIT(A) 5. .3 4 $(5 / DR 2. $% ! / RESPONDENT 4. & 0( / CIT 6. 4 6 7 ' / GF