Sh. Naresh Chauhan, Shimla V. DCIT, Chandigarh

ITA 344/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0046 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 344/CHD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 SHRI NARESH CHAUHAN, VS THE DCIT, ANANDAM VILLA, CENTRAL CIRCLE II, NEAR SARKEK HOUSE, CHANDIGARH. HORTICULTURE ROAD, NAV BAHAR, SHIMLA. PAN: ABPPC2719N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VISHAL MOHA N RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR,CIT-DR DATE OF HEARING : 25.04.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.05.2016 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-3 GURGAON DATED 08.01.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. WE HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECOR D. 3. ON GROUND NO. 1, ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ADDITIO N OF RS. 1,09,919/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UN ACCOUNTED CONTRACTUAL RECEIPTS. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER NOTED FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE DETAILS OF CONTRACTUA L RECEIPTS FILED BY ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN CONTRACTUAL RECEIPTS OF RS. 15,74,500/- FROM THE 2 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, B&R DIVISION, HIMACHAL PRADESH PWD IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE UN DER CONSIDERATION. HOWEVER, IN TDS CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER AS ABOVE, THE TOTAL CONTRACTUAL PAYMENT CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN RELEVANT YEAR WAS RS. 16,84,419/-. SINCE DIFFERENC E OF RS. 1,09,919/- COULD NOT BE RECONCILED THEREFORE, ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION 4. AFTER CONSIDERING RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF T HE VIEW THE MATTER REQUIRES RE-CONSIDERATION AT THE LE VEL OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE'S COUNSEL HAS REFERRED TO PB-21 AND 22 WHICH IS TDS CERTIFICATE I SSUED BY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HPPWD IN WHICH THE CONTRACTU AL RECEIPTS HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN A SUM OF RS. 15,74,500/ -. IT IS NOT CLARIFIED AS TO FROM WHERE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS TAKEN THE FIGURE OF RS. 16,84,419/-. THE LD. DR CONTENDED THAT THIS CERTIFICATE FILED AT PAGE 21-22 OF THE PAPER BOOK WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FILED BEFORE ASSESSI NG OFFICER. IN VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE SET ASIDE ORDER S OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FIL E OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH DIRECTION TO RE-DECIDE THIS ISSUE AFTER VERIFYING THE FACTS FROM THE TDS CERTIFICATE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE CONFIRMING THE SAME RECEIPTS, AS HAS B EEN SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL GIVE REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE T AKING 3 FINAL DECISION ON THE MATTER. THIS GROUND OF APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. ON GROUND NO. 2, ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ADDITIO N OF RS. 1,39,248/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNACCOUNTED INTEREST. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED FROM THE DET AILS OF INTEREST INCOME ON FIXED DEPOSIT THAT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 1,12,711/- FROM UCO BA NK IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT, BUT, AS PER TDS CERTI FICATE ISSUED BY UCO BANK, TOTAL INTEREST CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS RS. 2,51,959/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT SINCE ASSESSEE FAILED TO RECONCILE THE DISCREPANCY THEREFORE, ADDITION OF RS. 1,39,248/- WAS MADE. THE ASSESSEE PLEADED BEFO RE LD. CIT(APPEALS) THAT ASSESSEE HAS CREDITED A SUM O F RS. 2,30,200/- AS INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST WHI CH HAVE BEEN DULY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUN T AND SHOWN IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THEREFORE, THE DIFFERENCE REMAINED OF RS. 21,759/- ONLY. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, DID NOT ACCEPT CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 6. AFTER HEARING RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF THE V IEW THE MATTER REQUIRES RE-CONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE, AS PER TDS CERTIF ICATE ISSUED BY UCO BANK, HAS ACCEPTED THE BANK INTEREST IN A SUM OF RS. 2,51,959/- BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) . PB-4 IS COMPUTATION OF INCOME FILED BY ASSESSEE WHI CH SHOWS THAT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN BANK INTEREST IN THE 4 BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN A SUM OF RS. 2,30,200/- THEREFO RE, IT APPEARS THAT THIS FIGURE IS NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE LEFT FOR MAKING ADDITION AGAINST AS SESSEE WOULD BE RS. 21,759/- ONLY. WE, ACCORDINGLY, SET A SIDE THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND RESTORE THIS IS SUE ALSO TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH DIRECTIO N TO RE- DECIDE THIS ISSUE AFTER VERIFYING THE BOOKS OF ACCO UNT AND RETURNED INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BY GIVING REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (RANO JAIN) (BHAVNE SH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2 ND MAY, 2016. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD