Smt. Ashalata A. Tidke, Nagpur V. Income tax Officer,Ward 5(1), Nagpur

ITA 329/NAG/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 84668 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARENDRA KANE
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ITA NO.329/NAG/2012 ( AY: 2006 - 2007 ) SMT. ASHALATA A TIDKE, 50, HANUMAN NAGAR, NAGPUR. / VS. ITO - WARD 5(1), NAGPUR. ./ PAN: ACVPT 7282 J ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENTBY : SHRI NARENDRA KANE / DATE OF HEARING : 11.09.2014 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 .09.2014 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 18.7.2012 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - II, NAGPUR DATED 7.2.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 2007. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, ASSESSEE RAISE D THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS WHICH READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , LD CIT (A) - II WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,38,000/ - MADE BY THE AO, WARD 5(1) AND THIS HONBLE COURT BE PLEASED TO DELETE THE SAID ADDITION AS ONE MADE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS IN THEIR PROPER PERSPECTIVE. 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE T O THE FOREGOING GROUND AND ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT (A) - II, WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS OF RS. 2,38,000/ - IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT BEING A ALADY AND IS NOT PROPERLY EQUIPPED WITH PROPER K NOWLEDGE OF ACCOUNT AND THERE COULD BE EXISTENCE OF PREPONDERANCE OF PROBABILITY OF HAVING GENUINE AVAILABILITY OF CASH OF RS. 2,38,000/ - THIS HONBLE COURT BE PLEASED TO DELETE THE SAID ADDITION AS ONE MADE IN UTTER DEROGATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 3. BRIEFLY STATED RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,18,917/ - AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS. 1,50,000/ - . ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE AC T AND MADE ADDITION AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,38,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS IN BANKS. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 4. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, AFTER CO NSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, CIT (A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. 2 PARAS 8.0 TO 8.2 ARE RELEVANT IN THIS REGARD. AGGRIEVED WITH THE DECISION OF THE CIT (A), ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY RAISING THE ABOVE MENTIONED GROUNDS. 5. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD DR HEAVILY RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD DR AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. ON PERUSAL OF THE SAID ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IN GENERAL AND PARAS 8.0 TO 8.2 IN PARTICULAR, WE FIND THE SAME ARE R ELEVANT IN THIS REGARD. FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLETENESS OF THIS ORDER, THE SAID PARAS 8.0 TO 8.2 OF THE CIT (A)S ORDER ARE REPRODUCED HERE WHICH READ AS UNDER: 8.0. GROUND NO.4: IN THIS GROUND, APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,38,000 / - OUT OF RS. 10,00,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITED BY THE APPELLANT IN BANK OF INDIA ON 21.12.2005. APPELLANT HAS PRODUCED EVIDENCE BEFORE AO TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 7,62,000/ - AND HENCE AO ONLY ADDED RS. 2,38,000/ - AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS IN THE BAN K. 8.1. DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, NO DIRECT EVIDENCE TO SHOW AS TO HOW APPELLANT CAME TO ACQUIRE THIS CASH OF RS. 2,38,000/ - [BESIDES RS. 7,62,000/ - ALREADY SHOWN TO AO] EXCEPT THAT APPELLANT PRODUCED DETAILS OF EARLIER INCOME TAX RETURNED INCOME A ND A TOTAL OF VARIOUS RECEIPTS OF THE YEAR AND EVEN CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM VARIOUS OTHER BANK ACCOUNTS WERE ADDED TO SHOW THAT APPELLANT HAS SUFFICIENT CASH. SWEEPING STATEMENT LIKE CASH WAS WITHDRAWN FROM ONE BANK TO DEPOSIT IN OTHER BANK. AS IF ALL RECE IPTS WERE KEPT AS SUCH AND NO EXPENSES WERE INCURRED BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE YEAR AND ONLY WORK APPELLANT WAS DOING WAS WITHDRAW CASH FROM ONE BANK TO DEPOSIT IN ANOTHER. THESE KINDS OF STATEMENTS WITHOUT ANY COGENT EVIDENCE ARE NO PROOF FOR ACCUMULAT ION OF CASH AND DO NOT GO TO SHOW THE UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITED BY THE APPELLANT IN BANK ACCOUNT. 8.2. AO HAS ALREADY GIVEN THE BENEFIT OF RS. 7,62,000/ - TO THE APPELLANT FROM SUCH ACCUMULATIONS AND NO NEW EVIDENCE / PROOF IS BROUGHT BEFORE ME TO SHOW THA T BESIDES RS. 7,62,000/ - CASH AVAILABLE WITH THE APPELLANT , WHICH AO HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHERE DID THE REST OF RS. 2,38,000/ - COME TO POSSESSION OF THE APPELLANT. HOW WAS IT BUILT UP IN CASH BOOK IF ANY. HOW CAN APPELLANT CONTINUED TO KEEP IT WITH H ERSELF AND NOT DEPOSIT IN OTHER BANK? HOW AND WHY IT WAS DEPOSITED IN A PARTICULAR BANK AS NO PRUDENT MAN WILL KEEP ALL INCOME IN CASH AND THEN IN ONE DAY WILL GO AND DEPOSIT IN A BANK ACCOUNT. IN ABSENCE OF ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER, I FIND NO REASONS TO INT ERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE AO HENCE ADDITION OF RS. 2,38,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. 8. FROM THE ABOVE, WE FIND WHILE CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY AO, CIT (A) HAS RIGHTLY ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE WITH F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE CIT (A) IS FAIR AND REASONABLE AND WE 3 FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE SAME AND IT DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DI SMISSED . 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCE D IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014. SD/ - SD/ - (VIVEK VARMA) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NAGPUR ; 12 /09/2014 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , / DR, ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, ( SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY) / ITAT, NAGPUR