Sh. Tansukh Bohra S/o Sh. Bheru Lal Bohra, JAIPUR V. DCIT, UDAIPUR

ITA 301/JODH/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 30123314 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 05-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR DEEPAK SEHGALCIT

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL: JODHPUR BENCH : JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA NO. 302/JODH/2012 (A.Y. 2009-10) & ITA NO. 301/JODH/2012 (A.Y. 2006-07) TANSUKH BOHRA S/O S. BHERULAL BOHRA VS DCIT, C/O. CHIR AMRIT LAW CHAMBERS, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, 6 TH FLOOR, UNIQUE DESTINATION UDAIPUR. OPP. TIMES OF INDIA, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR. PAN NO. AANPB5717E (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. PRAKUL KHURANA SH. RAHUL LAKHWANI. DEPARTMENT BY : DR. DEEPAK SEHGAL-CIT- DR. DATE OF HEARING : 02/09/2013. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23/09/2013. O R D E R PER BENCH. : THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARISE FROM THE COMMON ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), CENTRAL, JAIPUR, DATED 15/05/2012 PERTAINING TO A.YS. 2006-07 AND 2009-10. 2 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT D URING SEARCH IN THIS GROUP, AS PER PAGE 26 OF ANNEXURE A-6 FOUND AND SEI ZED, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THIS PAGE CONTAINED ACCOUNT OF SHRI HE ERA SINGH AND DETAILS OF LEVELING WORK DONE ON THE LAND OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE AND SITUATED AT RAM TALAI FOR WHICH PAYMENTS ON DIFFERE NT DATES BETWEEN 13/06/2005 TO 02/07/2005 HAD BEEN MADE. IN HIS STAT EMENT THE ASSESSEE WAS CONFRONTED WITH THIS PAGE VIA QUESTION NO. 3 AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED THAT THE CONTRACT FOR LEVELIN G OF THIS LAND WAS GIVEN TO SHRI HEERA SINGH, CONTRACTOR, AND HAD PAID RS. 1,20,000/- UPTO 1.7.2005 OUT OF BOOKS. HOWEVER, IN THE RETURN FILED THEREAFTER THIS AMOUNT WAS NOT DISCLOSED ON THE REASONING THAT, IN FACT, THIS PAYMENT WAS OUT OF WITHDRAWALS MADE SO THESE WERE NOT REQUI RED TO BE BOOKED. BUT THE A.O. WAS NOT AGREEABLE SINCE TOTAL WITHDRAW ALS OF THE FAMILY WAS RS. 2,58,000/- AND THAT OF THE ASSESSEE IT WAS RS. 45,000/-. IT WAS ALSO FOUND THAT THE ENTIRE CONTRACT WAS FOR RS. 1,6 1,000/- SO THE A.O. HAS, INSTEAD, MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 1,61,000/- IN ASSESSEES HANDS. 2.1 AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE WENT BEFORE LD. CIT(A) W HO HAS ALSO CONFIRMED THIS ADDITION MAINLY ON THE BASIS OF ASSE SSEES ADMISSION MADE IN HIS STATEMENT. THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER AGGR IEVED. 3 2.2 WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. BOTH PARTIES H AVE REITERATED THEIR OLD STAND. IT WAS ARGUED WITH THE HELP OF A D OCUMENT ASSESSEE PAPER BOOK-8 THAT THE WITHDRAWALS IN A.Y. 2005-06, AS PER THIS CHART, OF THE ENTIRE FAMILY COMES TO RS. 1,91,500/- AND TH ERE WERE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 1,07,400/-. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THIS A SSESSEE HAD RS. 80,000/- FROM MONEY LENDING BUSINESS. 2.3 PER CONTRA LD. D.R. HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 2.4 AFTER CONSIDERING RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE HAVE FOU ND THAT AS PER THIS PAGE ONLY A SUM OF RS. 1,35,000/- IS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN PAID. THE ASSESSEE HAD RS. 80,000/- FROM HIS MONEY LENDING BU SINESS AND THE CUMULATIVE BALANCE OF MORE THAN RS. 1 LAKH OF THE F AMILY WAS THERE. THEREFORE, THE PAYMENT OF RS. 1,35,000/- CAN BE TRE ATED AS COVERED UNDER THE ABOVE AVAILABLE CASH WITH THIS ASSESSEE. HENCE, WE ORDER TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS.1,61,000/- AND A LLOWED GROUND NO. (1) OF THIS APPEAL. 4 3 GROUND NO. (2) RELATES TO CHARGING OF INTEREST U/ S 234A, 234B, 234C AND 234D. THE CHARGING OF INTEREST IS MANDATOR Y BUT THE CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEF AND BENEFIT OF THE RELATED PRO VISIONS OF THE ACT HAS TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. THIS GROUND IS DIS MISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED. ITA NO. 302/JODH/2012 (A.Y. 2009-10) 5. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT ARISE FROM THE COMMON APPELLATE ORDER IN A.Y. 2009-10. THEREFORE, THIS AP PEAL IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IN ITA NO. 301/JODH/20 12 (A.Y. 2006-07) IS PARTLY ALLOWED; AND THE APPEAL IN ITA NO. 302/JO DH/2012 A.Y. 2009- 10 IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (N.K.SAINI) [HARI OM MARATH A] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2013. 5 VL/- COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT BY ORDER 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, JODHPUR