IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI CIRCUI T BENCH, RANCHI (BEFORE SHRI P.K.BANSAL, HONBLE A.M.& SHRI D,T. GA RASIA, HONBLE J.M .) I.T.A. NO. 37/RAN/2013 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 SHRI SHAILESH CHOUDHARY, B.S.CITY -VS- DCIT, CIRCLE-3, BOKARA (APPELLANT) PAN :ACNPC 0154E (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.K. PODDAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SATISH CHANDRA, D.R. DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : 03.05.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : 07.05.2013 ORDER PER BENCH : THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), JAMSHEDPUR DATED 28.02.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE ADDITION OF RS.19,48,000/- CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). 3. BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO THIS ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED FROM THE DETAILS, ON VERIFICATION OF THE PURCHASE AS SENT BY SAIL/BSL THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE THE PURCHASE VIDE BILL NO.AI/BOK/2006/05/001473 FOR RS.19,48,000/- BUT THE SAME COULD NOT BE REFLECTED IN THE PURCHASE SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, HE MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.19,48,000/-. THE ASSESSEE WENT IN AP PEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. BEFOR E THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE MADE THE SUBMISSIONS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN ANY OPP ORTUNITY TO GET THE PURCHASE VERIFIED. THE ENTRY NO. AI/BOK/2006/05/001473 FOR RS.19,48,00 0/- DATED 02.08.2006 WAS NOT A BILL AND NO PURCHASE WAS MADE. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITT ED A PHOTO COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 23.12.2011 BY SR. MANAGER (FINANCE), SAIL. TH E CIT(A) FORWARDED THE SAME TO 2 THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS REMAND REPORT. THE AS SESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REPORT CONTENDED THAT ON 02.08.2006, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE THE PURCHASE BUT ONLY THE AMOUNT OF RS.19,48,000/- WAS TENDERED FOR THE PURCH ASE OF THE MATERIALS BY THE ASSESSEE. THE PURCHASES WERE MADE ON 03.08.2006 TOTALLING RS. 19,53,564/- AND THE BALANCE WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON 03.08.2006 AMOUNTING TO RS. 5,565/- THROUGH CHEQUE NO.226957. THE CIT(A) FROM THE REMAND REPORT NOTED THAT THE FA CTS MADE BY THE LD. A.R. WERE CORRECT AND THEREFORE ON THIS BASIS, NO ADDITION CO ULD BE MADE. THE PURCHASE OF THE GOODS WORTH RS.19,53,564/- AS AN EXPENDITURE DULY E XPLAINED UNDER SECTION 69C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER COULD NOT EXAMINE THE SOURCE OF THE PAYMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY CO NSIDERED THE SAME. WE NOTED THAT THE PAYMENT OF RS.19,48,000/- WAS MADE BY THE ASSES SEE OUT OF HIS BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PRODUCED THE CERTIFICATE FROM THE CONCERNED BANK SHOWING THE TRANSACTION OF THE SAID AMOUNT. THE PAYMENT HAS BEE N MADE BY VARIOUS DRAFTS DATED 31.07.2006, THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AVAILABLE AT P AGE 6 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY SAIL IN RESPECT OF THE SAID AMOUNT IS ALS O AVAILABLE. SINCE THE AMOUNT WAS ROUTED THROUGH THE BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH WAS DULY DIS CLOSED IN THE INCOME-TAX RETURN, IN OUR OPINION, THE SAID AMOUNT CANNOT BE REGARDED TO BE THE UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE AS THE AMOUNT WAS RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSE E. WE ACCORDINGLY DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 7 TH MAY, 2013. SD/- SD/- [D.T.GARASIA] [P.K. BANSAL] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 7 TH MAY, 2013 3 COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: L SHRI SHAILESH CHOUDHARY, B.S.CITY 2. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, BOKARA 3. C.I.T.(A), 4. THE C.I.T., 5. THE D.R., I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY (ON TOUR) ITAT, RANCHI [MST, SR.P S]