Ranjan Kumar Chowdhury, Kolkata V. I.T.O.,Ward-51(1), Kolkata

ITA 356/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2438 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 24-07-2019
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 26-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M D SHAH

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 356/KOL/2019 RANJAN KR. CHOWDHURY, AY 2008-09 , SMC , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH: K OLKATA ( ) . . , ) [BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM] I.T.A. NO. 356/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 RANJAN KR. CHOWDHURY (PAN: ACOPC-0503E) VS. ITO, WARD 51(1), KOLKATA APPELLANT RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING 24.07.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04.09.2019 FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI M. D. SHAH, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT SHRI ALTAF HUSSAIN, ADDL. CIT, SR. DR ORDER PER SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-XXXII, KOLKATA DATED 16.09.2013 FOR AY 2008-09. 2. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED GROUND NO. 2 AGAI NST THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING AOS ORDER OF ADDITION OF RS.15,58,400/- , THE LD. AR RESTRICTED THE APPEAL TO RS.9,35,000/- ONLY. SO, WE NOTE THAT THE AO HAD MA DE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSITS AS UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN AXIS BANK ACCOUNT WHIC H THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DISCLOSE IN HIS ACCOUNT NO. 437010100123365 TO THE TUNE OF RS.15,58 ,400/-. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) ENHANCED AN AMOUNT OF RS.4,212/- (INTEREST), THUS T HE TOTAL ADDITION WAS TO THE TUNE OF RS.15,62,612/-. SINCE THE LD. AR HAS RESTRICTED TH E APPEAL ONLY IN RESPECT OF RS.9,35,000/- WE FIRST OF ALL CONFIRM THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) TO THE EXTENT OF RS.6,27,612/-. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE IS THAT THE AO RECEI VED AIR INFORMATION THAT DURING THE YEAR THAT A SUM OF RS.13,20,200/- WAS DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS SB ACCOUNT WITH AXIS BANK, PANIHATI BRANCH. THEREFORE, THE AO CALL ED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE 2 ITA NO. 356/KOL/2019 RANJAN KR. CHOWDHURY, AY 2008-09 SOURCE OF THE CASH DEPOSIT. THE ASSESSEE GAVE CERT AIN REPLIES/EXPLANATION WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE AO AND HE MADE AN ADDITION OF THE T OTAL AMOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF RS.15,58,400/-. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO WAS PLEASED TO CONFIRM THE SAME AS WELL AS ENHANCED IT BY ANOTHER SUM OF RS.4,212/- WHICH WAS INTEREST CREDITED ON 25.12.200 7 OF RS. 690/- AND INTEREST CREDITED ON 31.03.2008 RS.3,522/-, THUS THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRME D THE AMOUNT OF RS.15,62,612/-. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US AND THE LD. AR HAS RESTRICTED THE APPEAL TO THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING RS.9,35,000/-. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES IT IS NOTED FROM PAGE 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH IS THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE AXIS BAN K [WHICH WAS THE SUM OF MONEY UNDISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME ] WHEREIN IT IS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED CASH ON 24.03.2008 TO THE TUNE OF RS. 9 L ACS. ACCORDING TO LD. AR, THIS RS. 9 LACS IS FROM THE ASSESSEES OWN ACCOUNT FROM THE PROPRIE TORSHIP CONCERN CALLED M/S. CHOUDHURY DISTRIBUTORS WHICH MAINTAINED ACCOUNT IN UCO BANK [ ACCOUNT NO.01870500570831]. MY ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TO PAGE 2 OF THE PAPER BOOK THE REIN THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.03.2008 TO 31.03.2008 IS GIVEN OF TH E UCO BANK OF THE PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN WHEREIN I NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE ON 24.03.2 008 HAD TRANSFERRED RS. 9 LAKHS TO SB ACCOUNT 17628. MY ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TO PAGE 4 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH IS THE ACCOUNT OPENED IN THE UCO BANK IN THE JOINT NAMES OF THE AS SESSEE AND HIS WIFE SMT. UTPALA CHOUDHURY (SB ACCOUNT NO. 17628). MY ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TO PAGE 6 OF THE PAPER BOOK FROM WHERE I NOTE THAT ON 24.03.2008 THERE WAS A CR EDIT OF RS. 9 LAKHS WHICH WAS TRANSFERRED FROM THE PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERNS BANK ACCOUNT IN U CO BANK TO THIS JOINT ACCOUNT. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT ON THE VERY SAME DATE ON 24.03.2008 RS. 9 LAKHS WAS WITHDRAWN. THUS, ACCORDING TO LD. AR, THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 9 LAKHS WHI CH THE ASSESSEE HAD IN HIS PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN (M/S. CHOUDHURY DISTRIBUTORS) WAS TRANSFERR ED TO THE JOINT ACCOUNT (SB A/C. NO.176287) BY CHEQUE AND ON THE VERY SAME DATE I.E. ON 24.03.2008 IT WAS WITHDRAWN AND DEPOSITED IN THE AXIS BANK WHICH WAS THE UNDISCLOSE D BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THUS, IT IS NOTED THAT RS. 9 LAKHS CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE ASSESSEES UNDISCLOSED BANK ACCOUNT IN AXIS BANK ON 24.03.2008 WHICH WAS WITHDRAWN FROM TH E JOINT ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE IN THE 3 ITA NO. 356/KOL/2019 RANJAN KR. CHOWDHURY, AY 2008-09 UCO BANK ON 24.03.2008. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR DRE W OUR ATTENTION TO THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE AO/LD. CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BALANCE SHEET HAD SHOWN THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT WITHDRAWN OF RS. 9 LAKHS WAS SUPPOSED TO HAV E BEEN GIVEN TO HIS WIFE SMT. UTPALA CHOUDHURY AND THIS FACT IS EVIDENT FROM THE FACT TH AT SMT. UTPALA CHOUDHURY HAS BEEN SHOWN AS A DEBTOR IN THE BALANCE SHEET AND THEREFOR E THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. THE LD. AR IN HIS REJOINDER EXPLAINED TH E FACT THAT UNDISPUTEDLY RS. 9 LAKHS WAS TRANSFERRED BY CHEQUE ON 24.03.2008 FROM ASSESSEES PROPRIETORSHIP BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED IN UCO BANK TO THE JOINT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE MAINTAINED IN THE UCO BANK (SB A/C. NO.17628) AS REFLECTED IN PAGE 6 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND THEREAFTER THE SUM OF RS. 9 LAKH WAS WITHDRAWN AND SINCE THE ASSES SEE HAD NOT DISCLOSED THE BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH AXIS BANK, THE SUM OF RS. 9 LAKHS H E HAD DEPOSITED IN THE AXIS BANK[ UN- DISCLOSED] WAS NECESSARILY SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHE ET AS DEBT GIVEN TO HIS WIFE. BECAUSE OF THIS REASON THERE WAS CONFUSION. ACCORDING TO LD. AR, IF THE AO HAD RE-CASTED THE BALANCE SHEET, THEN THE CREDIT AND DEBIT COULD HAVE GOT CAN CELLED. I FIND FORCE IN THE EXPLANATION RENDERED BY THE LD. AR ON THIS ISSUE THAT IF THE BA LANCE SHEET WAS RE-CASTED WITH THE AXIS BANK STATEMENT THEN THE SOURCE OF RS. 9 LAKHS COUL D HAVE BEEN EASILY TRACED AND FOUND OUT. THUS, IN THE LIGHT OF THE EXPLANATION DISCUSSED SUP RA, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO SHOW THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT OF RS. 9 LA KHS IN THE AXIS BANK ACCOUNT AND, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS. 9 LAKHS WAS NOT WARR ANTED. 5. THEREAFTER, THE LD. AR DREW MY ATTENTION TO THE NEXT ENTRY IN PAGE 1OF CASH FLOW STATEMENT OF AXIS BANK ACCOUNT WHEREIN ON 25.03.200 8 THE ASSESSEE HAD WITHDRAWN CASH TO THE TUNE OF RS. 35,000/- AND ON THE VERY NEXT DATE ON 26.03.2008 DEPOSITED RS. 60,000/- WHICH MEANS ACCORDING TO LD. AR, THE SUM OF RS.35, 000/- THE ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY IN HIS HANDS AND, THEREFORE, IT WILL BE DOUBLE ADDITION SO IF TELESCOPING OF THIS SUM OF RS. 35,000/- HAD TO BE GIVEN EFFECT TO. I FIND FORCE IN THE CON TENTION OF THE LD. AR THAT ASSESSEES CASH DEPOSIT ON 26.03.2008 WAS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 60,000 /-, WHICH INCLUDED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 35,000/- WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD IN HIS HAND ON 25.0 3.2008 AND, THEREFORE, TELESCOPING THE SAME, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE SOURCE OF RS.35, 000/- STANDS EXPLAINED. THUS, THE 4 ITA NO. 356/KOL/2019 RANJAN KR. CHOWDHURY, AY 2008-09 ASSESSEE GETS A TOTAL RELIEF OF RS.9,35,000/- WHICH IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 4TH SEPTEMBE R, 2019 SD/- (A. T. VARKEY) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019 JD. (SR. PS) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 APPELLANT SHRI RANJAN KR. CHOWDHURY, PROP. OF M/S. CHOWDHURY DISTRIBUTORS, PATBARI LANE, P.O. PANIHATI, 24 PGS. (N), KOLKATA-700 114. 2 RESPONDENT ITO, WARD-51(1), KOLKA6TA 3 4 5 CIT(A) -XXXII, KOLKATA. CIT , KOLKATA DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA / TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES