Shri Sabir Amin Rahman, Ghaziabad V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 3548/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87004 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 03-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 14-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R R KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJAN CHOPRA

Judgement Text

1 3548/DEL/2011 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL : VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K.: JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3548/DEL/2011 ASSTT. YR: 2006-07 SABIR AMIN RAHMAN, VS. DCIT CIRCLE-6(1), KD-17, KAVI NAGAR, NEW DELHI. GHAZIABAD. PAN: AEAPR 5367 R ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAJAN CHOPRA FCA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 04/03/2015. DATE OF ORDER : 10/03/2015. O R D E R PER G.D. AGRAWAL, V.P. : THIS APPEAL, BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECTED AGAINST C IT(A)S ORDER DATED 28-02-2013, RELATING TO A.Y. 2006-07. 2. IN THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE VARIOUS GROUNDS A RE RAISED. HOWEVER, THEY ARE ALL AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,02,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. 2 3548/DEL/2011 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, IT IS SUBMITTE D BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MISC. COMMISSION AND OTHER INCOME OF RS. 1,90,585/-. THIS INCOME WAS RECEIVED IN CASH AND, T HEREFORE, AVAILABLE FOR DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT. HE ALSO REFERRED TO THE CA SH FLOW STATEMENT PREPARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND POINTED OUT THAT AS PE R THE CASH FLOW, SUFFICIENT FUND WAS AVAILABLE ON EACH DATE FOR DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, HE WAS NOT ABLE TO PROVE WHETHER CASH FLOW STATEMEN T WAS FILED BEFORE THE AO OR NOT. HE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THERE WAS A CAS H WITHDRAWAL OF RS. 2 LACS ON 8-11-2005 FROM ICICI BANK. THUS, AVAILABILITY OF CASH WITH THE ASSESSEE WAS AMOUNTING TO RS. 4 LACS AND DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS ONLY RS. 2 LACS. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO SHOULD BE DELETED. 4. LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, STATED THAT THESE FAC TS AND THE EXPLANATION WERE NEVER GIVEN BEFORE THE AO AND, THEREFORE, THE SAME WOULD REQUIRE VERIFICATION AT THE END OF THE AO. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NO OBJECTIO N FOR SENDING THE MATER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO. IN VIEW OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND RESTORE T HE MATER BACK TO THE FILE OF AO. WE DIRECT THE AO TO CONSIDER THE ASSESSEES EXP LANATION AND THEREAFTER 3 3548/DEL/2011 RE-ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,02,000/-, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DEEMED TO BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 10/03/2015. SD/- SD/- ( GEORGE GEORGE K. ) ( G.D. AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 10/03/2015. *MP* COPY OF ORDER TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.