Rajesh Kumar, Rohtak V. ITO, Rohtak

ITA 3143/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4137 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 27-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 24-06-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVI RAMACHAN DRAN
• Keywords: Peak credit

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P.TOLANI, JM AND SHRI B.C.MEENA, AM ITA NO. 3143/DEL/2010 A.Y. 2007-08 SH. RAJESH KUMAR VS. ITO, WARD 2 , ROHTAK S/O SHRI MANGAT RAI 45, HUDA COMPLEJX, ROHTAK (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ARUN KUMAR JAIN, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SH. RAVI RAMA CHANDRAN, SR.D.R. O R D E R PER B.C.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE OR DER PASSED BY THE CIT (A), ROHTAK DATED 12.5.2010 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2007-08. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER. 1. THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) UNDER APPEAL IS AGAINST FACTS AND IS BAD IN LAW. 2. THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN RETAINING AN ADDITION OF RS. 3,25,023/- REPRESENTING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF RS. 3,26,318/- DEPOSITED ON 23.8.2006 IN HIS ACCOUNT WI TH STATE BANK OF PATIALA. PANIPAT AFTER GIVING ALLOWA NCE BEING THE OPENING BALANCE OF RS. 1,295/- THEREIN, W ITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SAME. ITA 3143/DEL/2010 PAGE 2 OF 3 SH. RAJESH KUMAR, ROHTAK A.Y. 2007-08 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND OR FORG O ANY GROUND OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF ITS HEARING. 2. DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD THERE WERE DEPOSITS OF RS. 25,25,000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE MAINTAINED WITH STA TE BANK OF PATIALA. THE A.O. MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 9,15,000/- TREATI NG THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF ASSESSEE. THE LD.CIT(A) GRAN TED PART RELIEF AND SUSTAINED THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,25,023/-. THIS WAS THE AMOUNT OF PEAK CREDIT OF ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT AS ON 23 RD AUGUST, 2006. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A PAPER BOOK CONTAINING 7 PAGES BEFORE T HE LD.CIT(A). IN PAGE NO.6 THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE A CASH FLOW STATEMENT. DURING THE HEARING THE LD.A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE CASH DEPOSITED IN TH E BANK WAS FROM CASH AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO P.NO.6 OF THE PAPER BOOK. FROM THE RECORDS WE FIND THAT THE A.O. HAS N OT CONSIDERED THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE. PRO PER SCRUTINY OF THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT IS A MUST TO ARRIVE AT ANY CONC LUSION. THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT IS TO BE SCRUTINIZED AT A.O. LEVEL TO REA CH AT THE ROOT OF THE ISSUE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND E QUITY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND RESTORE THE ISSUE BA CK TO THE FILE OF A.O. FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE DENOVO AFTER PROVIDING A REASONA BLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA 3143/DEL/2010 PAGE 3 OF 3 SH. RAJESH KUMAR, ROHTAK A.Y. 2007-08 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH APRIL,2011. SD/- SD/- (R.P.TOLANI) (B.C.MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER DATED: 29 TH APRIL, 2011 *MANGA COPY OF THE ORDER IN ITA 3143/DEL/2010 FORWARDED T O: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT (A); 5.DR 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY //