ITO, UDAIPUR V. Smt. Dadam Devi, UDAIPUR

ITA 373/JODH/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 37323314 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 06-05-2014
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N A JOSHI
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Revised return
• Section: 142(1); 68; 145

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL: JODHPUR BENCH : JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA NO.373/JODH/2013 (A.Y. 2003-04) ITO, WARD-1(2) , VS. SMT. D ADAM DEVI, UDAIPUR. NEAR BASANT VIHAR, MALI COLONY, UDAIPUR. PAN NO. AALPN 2137 Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI YOGESH POKHARNA. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI N.A. JOSHI - D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 06/05/2014. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11/06/2014. O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA, J.M THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR A.Y 2 004- 2005 AND EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), UDA IPUR, DATED 28.03.2013. 2. THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THIS APPEAL: 2 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- (1) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,22,826/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME FROM SALE OF MILK BASED ON LIVE STOCK OF 8 COWS. (2) RESTRICTING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME FROM NAGDA MOTOR BODY REPAIR WORKS OF RS. 2,41,986/- TO RS. 58,000/- DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE INCOME IN ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME FILED. (3) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,73,934/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CAPITAL INTRODUCED / CASH CREDITS. (4) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 20,00,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS. (5) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,80,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS SHOWN AS ADVANCE AGAINST SALE. (6) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,24,887/- MADE BY THE AO U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT IN RESPECT OF 3 UNEXPLAINED EXCESS CASH BALANCE FOUND IN BANK ACCOUNTS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE CAR EFULLY PERUSED THE ENTIRE MATERIAL ON RECORD. FIRST GROUN D OF REVENUES APPEAL RELATES TO DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 1,22,826/- MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME FR OM SALE OF MILK BASED ON LIFE STOCK COMPRISING OF 8 COWS. THE FACTS OF THIS GROUND ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDU AL DERIVING INCOME FROM SALE OF MILK, DUNG AND CALVES APART FRO M DERIVING INCOME FROM REPAIR WORKS OF MOTOR BODY REP AIRING AND FROM VERMIN COMPOST. THE ASSESSEE FILED HER RE TURN OF INCOME [ROI] DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 82,071/- ON 20.3.2004. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80JJA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ['THE ACT', FOR SHORT]. I T WAS NOTICED BY THE A.O. THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED GROSS RECEIPTS FROM SALE OF MILK, DUNG AND CALVES AT RS. 3,70,654/-. IN THE ABSENCE OF DETAILS PERTAINING TO THIS ENTIRE RECEIPT, THE A.O. HAS ESTIMATED TOTAL RECEIPTS AT RS. 4,93,4 80/- WITH REFERENCE TO ORDERS MADE FOR A.Y. 2003-04 AND 2004- 05. THIS HAS RESULTED INTO AN ADDITION OF RS. 1,22,826/-. I N APPEAL, IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE A.O. HAS MADE ESTIMATION WITHOU T 4 REJECTING BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ESTIMATION OF INCOME FROM THIS SOURCE IS SIMPLY ADHOC. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS AG REED WITH THIS SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAS DELETED THI S ADDITION WITH REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT WHEN THE A.O. HAS A CCEPTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT PRODUCED BEFORE HIM, THIS ADDI TION IS UNWARRANTED. 3.1 BEFORE US, SIMILAR ARGUMENTS WERE MADE AND THER E IS NO CHANGE OF FACTS REGARDING REJECTION OF BOOKS. THE A.O. HAS ESTIMATED THIS INCOME WITHOUT REJECTING THE BOOKS O F ACCOUNT AND AFTER ACCEPTING THE BOOKS WHICH IS AN ACT NOT P ERMISSIBLE IN LAW. ACCORDINGLY, WE ALSO CONFIRM THE DELETION OF ADDITION AND DISMISS GROUND NO. 1 RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 4. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF GROUND NO. 2 ARE TH AT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS NOTICE D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED GROSS PROFIT OF RS. 3,19,050/ - ON GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS. 7,54,091/- AND NET PROFIT OF RS. 6, 125/- FROM NAGDA MOTOR BODY. THIS INCOME HAS BEEN TREATED AS ON LOWER SIDE. THE A.O. HAS INVOKED SECTION 145(3) OF THE A CT AND HAS ESTIMATED INCOME FROM NAGDA MOTOR BODY BY APPLYING GROSS 5 PROFIT RATE OF 50% ON TOTAL RECEIPTS OF RS. 7,54,0 91/-. THE A.O. HAS ALLOWED FINANCIAL CHARGES OF RS. 2,41,986/ - AFTER REDUCING THE INCOME DECLARED IN THE RETURNS OF RS. 6,124/-. DURING APPEAL, IT WAS STATED THAT THE A.O. HAS WRON GLY ARRIVED AT THE FIGURE OF 2,41,986/-, WHICH, IN FACT , IS RS. 2,35,862/-. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE U/S 46A OF THE ACT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) IN SUPPORT OF VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL WHO CALLED FOR REMAND REPORT FROM THE A.O. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAME, THE LD. CIT(A) HE LD THAT ONCE SECTION 145(3) IS INVOKED, NO FURTHER ADDITION WHICH IS RS. 1,83,990/- ON APPLICATION OF HIGHER GROSS PROFI T RATE WHICH HAS RESULTED INTO ADDITION OF RS. 58,000/- IS WARRANTED. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THIS G ROUND. 4.1 BEFORE US, SIMILAR ARGUMENTS WERE REITERATED BY BOTH THE PARTIES AS WERE DONE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BEL OW. 4.2 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF THE SIMILAR VIEW THAT ONCE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) ARE INVOKED, NO FURTHER ADDITION IS WARRANTED. ACCORDI NGLY, WE 6 CONFIRM THE IMPUGNED DELETION AND CANNOT ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 5. FACTS APROPOS GROUND NO. 3 WHICH PERTAINS TO DEL ETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 1,73,934/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINE D CAPITAL INTRODUCTION. 5.1 FACTS APROPOS THIS GROUND ARE THAT DURING THE A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INTRODUCED A FRESH CAPITAL OF RS. 1,73,934/- IN HER CAPITAL ACCOUNT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF M/S NAGDA MOTOR BODY. WHEN REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE AMOUNT, IT WAS INFORMED THAT DUE TO FAILURE OF COMPUTER ON ACCOUNT VIRUS, ENTIRE DATA HAD BEEN LOST AND THE ASSESSEE HAD STAR TED AGAIN FEEDING SUCH DATA. BUT THE A.O. WAS NOT AGREEABLE A ND HAS ADDED THIS AMOUNT U/S 68 OF THE ACT BY TREATING THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSE E. 5.2 DURING APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE FOLLOW ING SUBMISSIONS: 'THE LEARNED AO TREATED RS 1,73,934/- OF ADDITION IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT, AS DISCLOSED IN ORIGINAL RETURN , AS THE U NEXPLAINED CASH 7 CREDIT UNDER 68, DUE TO FAILURE OF THE APPELLANT TO SUBMIT PROOF OF THE ADDITION. SIR, THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED REVISED CAPITA ACCOUNT ALONG WITH DETAILS OF SOURCES FROM WHERE THE ADDITION OF RS 85,000/- WERE MADE. THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED DETAILED CASH FLOW STATEMEN T OF NAGDA DAIRY, VERMI COMPOST ACTIVITY AND NAGDA MOTOR BODY AND HER PERSONAL SOURCES BEFORE THE LEARNED AO (A C OPY OF WHICH IS ENCLOSED FOR YOUR READY REFERENCE) DETAILS OF ADDITION MADE IN CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND THE IR SOURCE ARE AS UNDER SMT DADAM DEVI NAGDA , THE APPELLANT, HERSELF IS OW NER OF THE NAGDA DAIRY AND THE AMOUNT WAS BROUGHT IN TO REPAY THE LOAN TO BHUMI VIKAS BANK. THE A 0 HAVE NOT REJECTED BOOKS O F ACCOUNT OF NAGDA DAIRY . CASH BOOK OF NAGDA DAIRY AND AS WELL AS CASH BOOK OF NAGDA MOTOR BODY CONTAINS ENTRIES OF ABOVE TRANSACT IONS. DATE AMOUNT SOURCE REMARK 23.06.03 RS 50.000/ - CASH FROM NAGDA DAIRY FOR DEPOSITING IN LOAN ACCOUNT 06.11.03 RS 20.000/ - CASH FROM NAGDA DAIRY FOR DEPOSITING IN LOAN ACCOUNT 23.02.04 RS 15.000/ - CASH FROM NAGDA DAIRY FOR DEPOSITING IN LOAN ACCOUNT 8 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE AND OTHER, WE WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THEM WHEN THE LEARNED AO HAVE REJECTED BOOKS OF ACC OUNT OF NAGDA MOTOR BY INVOKING PROVISIONS UNDER SECTION 14 5 (3), THEN HE CANNOT MADE ADDITION BASED ON THE SAME BOOKS OF ACC OUNT. SIR, IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, THE ADDITION IN CAPITA L ACCOUNT OF RS 85.000/- STAND PROVED AND AS THE APPELLANT HAVE NOT INTRODUCED BALANCE AMOUNT, THE ADDITION MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT B E DELETED. 5.3 ON THIS POINT, THE A.OS REMAND REPORT READS AS UNDER: ' 3.2. CAPITAL INTRODUCTION - RS.1,73,934 - ASSESSE E HAD CREDITED THIS AMOUNT IN HER CAPITAL ACCOUNT IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. NAGDA MOTOR BODY (ORIGINAL BALANCE SHEET FILED WITH THE R ETURN OF INCOME). IN ABSENCE OF ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE TO P ROVE THE SOURCE OF THE AMOUNT CREDITED, IN AS MUCH AS HE AMO UNT CANNOT ALSO BE SAID TO BE OUT OF DECLARED SOURCE THE A.O. TREATED THE CREDIT AS UNEXPLAINED, U/S68 OF THE IT ACT AND ADDE D THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE (PARA 8 OF ASSTT. ORDER). NOW THE CONTENTION BEFORE YOUR HONOUR IN THE WRITTE N SUBMISSION DATED 23.8.2007 IS DURING THE COURSE OF ASSTT. PROC EEDINGS THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED REVISED RETURN WITH REVISED BALA NCE SHEET IN WHICH THE CAPITAL CREDIT AMOUNT WAS SHOWN AT RS. 85 ,000 AS UNDER: 23.6.2003 RS. 50,000/- 6.11.2003 RS. 20,000/- 23.2.2004 RS. 15,000/- 9 THE SOURCE IS STATED AS CASH FROM NAGDA DAIRY FOR R EPAYMENT OF LOAN. IN NAGDFA DAIRTY ACCOUNT, THE NET INCOME OF RS.4,39,46 0 HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO TAX AND WHILE DOING THE A.O. DENIED DEDUCTION U/S .80JJA MOREOVER, LHAVE ALREADY RECOMMENDED FOR CONFIRMING AN ADDITIO N OF RS.86,737 IN NAGDA MOTOR BODY ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, ADDING EVEN CR EDIT AMOUNT OF RS.85,000 IN MY VIEW, WILL NOT BE JUSTIFIED. IT MAY BE MENTIONED HERE THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.1,73,934 IS TAKEN BY THE A.O AS PE R ORIGINAL BALANCE SHEET WHEREAS FOR MAKING ANOTHER ADDITION (CASH AND BANK BALANCE - DISCUSSED BELOW) HE RELIED ON THE REVISED BALANCE SHEET FILED WITH THE REVISED RETURN. I FEEL THAT IT IS NOT CORRECT TO RELY ON A BALANCE SHEET FOR ONE ADDITION AND ANOTHER BALANCE SHEET FOR SOME OTHER ADDITION. ONE HAS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH ANY ONE BALANCE SHEET OR SHOULD HAVE REJECTED BOTH.' 5.4 AFTER CONSIDERING THE ABOVE EVIDENCE, THE LD. C IT(A) HAS DELETED THE ENTIRE AMOUNT ON THE REASONING THAT THI S ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE BASIS OF BALANCE SHEET FILED A LONGWITH ORIGINAL RETURN WHEREAS OTHER ADDITION ON ACCOUNT O F CASH AND BANK BALANCE HAS BEEN MADE ON THE BASIS OF SECOND B ALANCE SHEET FILED ALONGWITH REVISED RETURN. 5.5 BEFORE US, BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE REITERATED THE SAME ARGUMENTS AS WERE TAKEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 10 5.6 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE A.O. CANNOT PICK ONE THING TO ADD FROM ONE BALANCE SHEET AND THE OTHER FROM THE OTHER BALANCE SHEET FI LED ALONGWITH THE REVISED RETURN. ACCORDINGLY, WE FIND THE DELETION IN ORDER AFTER GOING THROUGH THE REMAND RE PORT AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE DISMISS GROUND NO. 3 OF REVENUES APPEAL. 6. FACTS APROPOS GROUND NO. 4 PERTAINING TO DELETIO N OF ADDITION OF RS. 20 LAKHS MADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUN T OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITORS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S SHOWN LOAN OF RS. 20 LAKHS IN THE NAME OF SHRI NARENDRA N AGDA. WHEN REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THIS LOAN, IT WAS STATED THAT THE ENTIRE ACCOUNTING DATA WAS LOST DUE TO VIRUS IN THE COMPUTER AND TIME WAS SOUGHT TO REFEED THE SAME. BUT THE A.O. DID NOT WAIT AND ADDED THIS AMOU NT U/S 68 IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE MADE THE FOLLOWING SUBMISSIONS : 'THE LEARNED AO HAVE TREATED ABOVE AMOUNT AS UNEXPL AINED CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68, AS THE APPELLANT COULD NOT PRODUCE CONF IRMATION OF TRANSACTION FROM THE HUSBAND OF THE APPELLANT AND A CCORDING TO HIM 11 APPELLANT HAVE NOT FURNISHED, WHICH REQUIRED TO PRO VE THAT THESE TRANSACTIONS WERE GENUINE, AND SH NARENDRA NAGDA IS HAVING CREDITWORTHINESS REGARDING SUCH FUND. WITH RESPECT TO ABOVE, WE BEG TO SAY THAT THE DUE T O LOSS OF DATA IN COMPUTER, APPELLANT AGAIN COMPILED HIS ACCOUNTS ON THE BASIS OF AVAILABLE RECORDS WITH HER . HOWEVER ON RECOMPILATION IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THERE ARE MAJOR DIFFERENCE IN SEVERAL ITEMS OF EXPENSES , ASSETS AND LIABILITIES WHICH WERE PREPARED EARLIER. AFTER THOROUGH INQUIRY , IT WAS FOUND THAT THE PART TIME ACCOUNTANT WHO PREPARED EARLIER ACCOUNTS WERE MADE SEVERAL MISTAKES AND AS THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED RETURN ON 2 0 TH APRIL 2004, IMMEDIATELY AFTER COMPLETION OF FINANCIAL YEAR, COU LD NOT DETECT THE SAME. FURTHER AS THE ID AO WAS INSISTING ON FILING OF TRUE RETURN OF INCOME, APPELLANT FILED FRESH RETURN IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 142(1) AND SUBMITTED HER TRUE STATE OF AFFA IRS. DEPARTMENT IT APPELLANT HAVE SUBMITTED HER REVISED STATEMENT OF A FFAIRS IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SEC 142 (1) AS UNDER: THUS FROM ABOVE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANT HAVE RAISED UNSECURED LOAN OF RS 13,51,140/-FROM SHREE NARENDRA NAGDA, HER HUS BAND. NOT RS 20.00 LACS AS SHOWN IN HER ORIGINAL STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS. FURTHER THE APPELLANT HAVE SUBMITTED FOLLOWING DETA ILS BEFORE THE LEARNED A 0 TO ESTABLISH THE CORRECTNESS OF TRANSAC TION: 1. NAME & ADDRESS OF LENDER 2. HIS PAN NO 3. COPY OF HIS BANK ACCOUNT FROM WHERE THE MONEY WERE TRANSFERRED 4. DETAILS OF JOINT LAND PROPERTY OWNED BY THE APPE LLANT, WHERE INVESTMENT WERE MADE ON HER BEHALF BY SH NARENDRA N AGDA, 12 4. ADDRESS OF AO WHERE THE ABOVESAID NARENDRA NAGDA WA S FILING HIS RETURN OF INCOME 5. DETAILS OF ASSESSEE'S LEDGER ACCOUNT WHEREIN ABOVE CREDIT WAS REFLECTED. HOWEVER DUE TO NON AVAILABILITY OF HER HUSBAND, APP ELLANT COULD NOT FILE HIS CONFIRMATION ON 27 TH DEC 2006 BEFORE COMPLETION OF HER ASSESSMENT. SIR, PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED NOW ON BEHALF OF THE APPE LLANT THE AFFIDAVIT OF SH NARENDRA NAGDA, DULY SWORN BEFORE THE NOTARY ON 28 TH DEC 2006, CONFIRMING TRANSACTIONS WITH THE APPELLANT. SIR, AS THE AFFIDAVIT IS CONFIRMING ONLY THE DETAIL S FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED AO, THE SAME WILL NOT BE FRESH EVIDENCE SUBMITTED B EFORE YOUR GOODSELF AND RULE 46A WILL NOT APPLY IN THIS MATTER. IN SUPPORT OF AFFIDAVIT WE ARE ALSO FILING COPIES O F HIS BANK ACCOUNT (THOUGH THE SAME WERE FILED BEFORE AO). THUS APPELLANT IS DISCHARGING HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO IDENTITY OF CREDITOR, GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF LENDER. IN VIEW OF THESE, YOUR GOODSELF ARE REQUESTED TO DE LETE THE ADDITION OF RS 20,00,OOO/-MADE BY THE LEANED AO.' FURTHER, REPORT OF THE A.O. ON ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE S FILED DURING THE APPEAL HAS BEEN OBTAINED WHICH IS AS UNDER: ' 3.4. LOAN FROM SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA - RS.20 LAKHS. IN THE PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET FILED ALONGWITH THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASS ESSEE HAD SHOWN LOAN OF 13 RS. 20 LAKHS . DURING THE COURSE OF ASSTT. PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSE E FILED COPY OF LEDGER SHOWING DETAILS OF UNSECURED LOAN RE CEIVED FROM SHRI N.N. NAGDA. NOW, IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE YOU IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ALL HE DETAILS TH AT WERE REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH LOAN TAKEN FROM SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA, HUSB AND OF THE ASSESSEE WERE FILED , INCLUDING THE PAN AND THE WARD WHERE H E IS ASSESSED TO TAX. HIS CONFIRMATION COULD NOT BE FILED DUE TO HIS UNAV AILABILITY. THE A/R. HAS NOW FILED THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE CREDITOR CONFIRM ING THE LOAN ADVANCED TO THE ASSESSEE AS UNDER. AS REGARDS THE BALANCE OF RS. 7,38,819/-(19,43,819- 12.05.000/-) (NOT RS. 7,43,819/- AS MENTIONED IN THE AFFIDAVIT), IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED BY SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED ON 6.4.2011 THAT HE AND HIS WIFE ARE ENGAGED IN PROPERTY DEALING . HE ALONG WITH HIS WIFE SMT. DADAM DEVI, THE ASSESSEE, PURCHASED TWO PIECES OF A GRICULTURAL LAND IN JOINT OWNERSHIP AS UNDER:- 1-1/4 BIGHA LAND IN MALI COLONY, UDAIPUR ON 12.4.20 02 FOR RS. 2,24,030/- 2-1/4 BIGHA -DO- ON 23.8.2002 FOR RS.2,29,360/- AND AFTER PURCHASE OF THE LAD, THE LAND WAS GOT DEV ELOPED IN THE YEAR 2003-04. IT IS FURTHER STATED THAT SINCE SMT. DADAM DEVI HAD NO FUNDS TO SPARE THE ENTIRE AMOUNT FOR PURCHASE AND DEVELOPMEN T WAS BORNE BY THE ASSESSEE. 1/2 SHARE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE ENTIRE I NVESTMENT CAME TO RS. 7,38,819/- AND THE SAME WAS SHOWN AS LOAN FROM NARE NDRA NAGDA. IN OTHER 14 WORDS THE INVESTMENT HAS BEEN MADE FROM OUT OF THE BANK LOAN PROVIDED BY SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA JOINTLY. IN THIS REGARD THE COPIES OF REGISTERED DEED FOR PURCHASE OF LAND HAVE BEEN FILED. IT HAS A LSO BEEN STATED THAT BOTH SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA AND HIS WIFE HAVE SHOWN TH E LANDS IN THE BALANCE SHEET FILED ALONGWITH THE RETURN INCOME OF THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSES. 6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE A SSESSEE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN HIS FINDING WHICH READS AS UNDER: I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE EVIDENCES FILED FIRST OF ALL IT MAY BE MENTIONED THAT SHRI NA RENDRA NAGDA IS A REGULAR ASSESSEE, ASSESSED WITH ITO, WARD-1(1), UDA IPUR AND HE HAD FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2004-05 ON 21.04.2004 WITH ITO, WARD- 1(1), UDAIPUR. IN THE PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET FILED ALONG WITH THIS RETURN 'SUNDAY DEBTORS' ARE SHOWN AT RS. 21,02,280/ -. THIS IS INCLUSIVE OF RS. 19,43,819/-IN THE NAME OF SMT. DAD AM DEVI NAGDA. THE RETURN OF INCOME IN THE CASE OF THE 1 ASSESSEE WAS ORIGINALLY FILED ON 20.4.2004 (JUST A DAY BEFORE THE DATE OF FILING RET URN BY SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA) AS PER WHICH THE CREDIT IN THE NAME OF NAREN DRA NAGDA WAS SHOWN AT RS. 20 LACS. THE PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET OF THE A SSESSEE FILED ALONG WITH THE REVISED RETURN SHOWS THE CREDIT IN THENAME OF SHRI NARENDRA NAGDS AT RS. 19,43,819/-THUS THE DEBT SHOWN BY SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA AND THE CREDIT SHOWN BY SMT. DADAM DEVI NAGDA TALLIES. FURTHER, IT HAS BEEN NOTICES THAT THE PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSE SSEE AS ON 31.3.2003/ AND 31.3.2004 SHOWS FIXED ASSETS (LAND) AS UNDER- 31.3.2003 RS.4,71,771/- 31.3.2004 RS.15,59,520/- 15 HAVING REGARD O THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE EVIDENCE FILED/ AVAILABLE ON RECORD, THE CREDIT OF RS. 18,38 ,819/- AS PER THE BALANCE SHEET FILED ALONG WITH THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS VERIFIABLE. NO EVIDENCE REGARDING VERIFICATION O F RS. 1,05,000/- HAS BEEN FILED BY SH. NARENDRA NAGDA.' 6.3. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPEL LANT, FINDINGS OF THE ID. A.O. GIVEN IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS T HE REMAND REPORT RECEIVED ON THIS POINT. THE REMAND REPORT SO RECEIV ED WAS ALSO CONFRONTED TO THE APPELLANT DURING THE COURSE OF HE ARING. IT IS SEEN THAT THE APPELLANT HAS OBTAINED THE LOAN FROM HER HUSBAN D THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES WHICH HAS BEEN VERIFIED BY THE ID. A. O. DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. THE CREDITOR IS A REGULAR INCOM E-TAX ASSESSEE AND THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO GIVEN PAN, FIELD CONFIRMATIO N DURING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT OF BOTH THE APPEL LANT AS WELL AS THE CREDITOR. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE APPELLANT HAS DISCHARGED HER ONUS LAID ON HER BY PROVING THE CRED ITWORTHINESS, IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR. SHE HAS ALSO PROVED THE S OURCE OF THE AMOUNT CREDITED IN HER ACCOUNT. IT IS ALSO NOT A CASE OF T HE ID. A.O. THAT THE CREDITOR HAS DENIED OF HAVING GIVEN ANY LOAN TO THE APPELLANT. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO SCOPE FOR MAKING ANY ADDITIO N U/S.68 IN RESPECT OF THE LOAN TAKEN FROM SHRI NARENDER NAGDA AND IF ANY AMOUNT REMAINED UNEXPLAINED IN THE HANDS OF THE CREDITOR, IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN HIS HANDS AND CANNOT BE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE APPEL LANT FOR WANT OF SOURCE OF THE SOURCE OF THE CREDIT.. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE U/S,68 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN FROM SHRI NARENDER NA GDA IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED AND I ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THIS GROUND OF 1 A PPEAL IS ALLOWED. 16 7. BEFORE US, BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE REITERATED THEI R ORIGINAL STAND AS MENTIONED IN THE ABOVE EXTRACTION. 7.1 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE CONVINCED THAT REQUISITE PROOF TO PROVE THE LOAN OF RS. 20 LAKHS IN TERMS OF SECTION 68 HAS BEEN PRODUCED BY T HE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS BEEN VERIFIED BY THE A.O. AND CO NFIRMED BY THE CREDITORS. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN FROM SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA HAS TO BE DELETED WHICH HAS BEEN RIGHTLY DELETED BY THE LD. C IT(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS GROUND NO. 4 OF REVENUES A PPEAL. 7.2 FACTS APROPOS GROUND NO. 5 OF REVENUES APPEAL WHICH PERTAIN TO DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 1,80,000/- M ADE BY THE A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF CASH CREDIT SHOWN AS ADVANCED AG AINST SALE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED CREDIT OF RS . 1,80,000/- AS ADVANCE AGAINST SALE IN THE BALANCE S HEET ALONGWITH ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE SIMPLY REFERRED TO THE POSITION OF THE COMPUTER AS STATED IN OTHER GROUNDS WHICH RESULTED INTO THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. DURING 17 APPEAL, THE FOLLOWING WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WAS FILED WHICH WAS SUBJECTED TO REMAND REPORT: ' THE LEARNED AO TREATED THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED CA SH CREDIT U/S 68 IN VIEW OF NON SUBMISSION OF EXPLANATION REGARDING NAT URE OF AMOUNT RECEIVED, FROM WHOM IT WAS RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT DESPITE PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY. FACTUAL POSITION IT IS TRUE THAT THE SAID AMOUNT WAS SHOWN AS ADVANC E REED AGAINST SA E OF LAND IN THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS SUBMITTED ALONG WI TH ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME SUBMITTED ON 20 TH APRIL 2004, DUE TO FAULTY ACCOUNTS PREPARED BY THE ACCOUNTANT. HOWEVER ON RECOMPILATION OF ACCOUNT IT WAS FOUND BY THE APPELLANT THAT THE TRANSACTION FOR WHICH ADVANCE WAS SHOWN IS ALREADY COMPLETED DURING THE YEAR, THEN IN FRESH RETURN, THE INCOME FROM THE CAP ITAL GAIN IS OFFERED FOR TAXATION. BESIDES THIS DETAIL, CASH FLOW AS REQUIRE D BY THE AO WAS ALSO SUBMITTED, IN WHICH THE SAID AMOUNT AND PARTICULARS OF TRANSACTIONS IS DISCLOSED. DESPITE THIS THE LEARNED AO FAILED TO CONSIDER IT, AND TREATED THE SAME INCOME FROM UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. SIR, FOR YOUR READY REFERENCE WE ARE SUBMITTING SAL E DEED EXECUTED, PURCHASE DEED OF LAND. IN THE VIEW OF ABOVE FACTS, YOUR GOOD SELF IS REQUE STED TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS 1,80,000/- MADE U/S 68, ON ACCOUNT O F ADVANCE SHOWN AGAINST SALE IN ORIGINAL STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS AND OBLIGE. 18 7.3 THE A.O. FILED REMAND REPORT ON ADDITIONAL EVID ENCE AS UNDER : 'ADVANCE AGAINST SALE RS. 1,80,000 : THE ASSESSE E HAD SHOWN IN THE PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET FILED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME A CREDIT OF RS. 1,80,000 AS ' ADVANCE AGAINST SALE' B EFORE THE A.O. NO DETAILS OR EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE GENUINENES S OF THE CREDIT WERE FILED THOUGH DETAILS OF INVESTMENT, ADVA NCE FOR LAND AND CONFIRMATION OF LOAN FROM SHRI NARENDRA NAGDA W ERE FILED, THE ASSESSEE'S A/R. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSTT. PRO CEEDINGS HAD ALWAYS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO FAILURE OF COMPUT ER ON ACCOUNT OF VIRUS, WE HAVE LOST ENTIRE ACCOUNTING DA TA AND HAVE STARTED AGAIN FEEDING ACCOUNTING INFORMATION'. HO WEVER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSTT. PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE FILED A REVISED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, IN THIS BALANCE SHEET C REDIT AMOUNT IN QUESTION DO NOT APPEAR, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED IN T HE ASSTT. ORDER THAT WHEN ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO HOW THE ADVA NCE SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET ORIGINALLY FILED IS NOT APPE ARING IN THE REVISED BALANCE SHEET, THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION OFF ERED, ACCORDINGLY THE AO ADDED THE AMOUNT OF RS.1.80 LACS U/S.68 OF THE IT ACT. IN THE WRITTEN REPLY FILED BEFORE YOU (PARA G) IT I S SUBMITTED THAT OF COURSE THE ADVANCE RECEIVED AGAINST THE SALE OF LAND WAS SHOWN IN THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS FILED WITH THE OR IGINAL RETURN BUT ON RECOMPILATION OF ACCOUNTS IT WAS FOUND THAT TRANSACTION FOR SALE (AGAINST WHICH ADVANCE WAS SHOWN) HAS ALREADY BEEN COMPLETED DURING THE YEAR, THEN INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAIN HAS BEEN OFFERED FOR TAXATION. IN MY VIEW, THE SUBMISSI ON APPEARS 19 TO BE JUSTIFIED, FIRST, THE RECEIPT OF ADVANCE IS SU PPORTED BY THE SALE AGREEMENT EXECUTED ON 10.12.200E BETWEEN THE A SSESSEE AND ONE SHRI LAXMAN SINGH. FURTHER, IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DECLARE ANY INCOME FROM CAPITAL GA IN. IN THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME THE ASSESSEE DECLARED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.84,260 WHICH THE A.O. HAS ASSESSED AT RS .1,05,000 AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN (PARA 13 OF A.O.) HERE AGAI N THE AO HAS ADOPTED DUEL MANNER FOR ADDING THE AMOUNT OF RS.1,8 0,000 ORIGINAL RETURN HAS BEEN CONSIDERED AND FOR TAXING CAPITAL GAIN, THE REVISED RETURN. THE BALANCE SHEET FILED WITH TH E RETURN DO NOT SHOW SUCH ADVANCE. HAVING REGARD TO THESE FACTS, IN MY VIEW, THE ADDITION IS UNWARRANTED.' 7.4 AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAME, THIS DELETION IS BA SED ON THE SATISFACTION OF THE A.O. DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDI NGS. IN THE LIGHT OF THIS REMAND REPORT, AND FACTUAL FINDING OF FACT BY THE A.O., IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENU E IS ITSELF UNTENABLE IN LAW. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS GROUND N O. 5 OF REVENUES APPEAL. 8. LAST GROUND, THAT GROUND NO. 6 PERTAINS TO DELET ION OF AD OF RS. 8,24,887/- MADE BY THE A.O. U/S 68 OF THE ACT ON AC COUNT OF UNEXPLAINED EXCESS CASH BALANCE FOUND IN THE BANK A CCOUNT. 20 8.1 FACTS OF THIS GROUND ARE THAT THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN CASH BALANCE IN THE BANK AND IN HAND TOTA LING TO RS. 63,603/-, BUT AS PER THE BANK STATEMENT FURNISHED, THE CASH BALANCE COMES TO RS. 4,85,731/- AND CASH IN HAND AS PER CAS H FLOW STATEMENT IS RS. 3,92,759/-. ON THE BASIS OF THIS EVIDENCE, THE A.O. HAS FOUND THAT THERE IS EXCESS CASH BALANCE OF RS. 8,24,887/-. AC CORDING TO THE A.O., WHEN THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN THIS ANOMALY, H E HAS TREATED THE CASH BALANCE OUT OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND HAS ADDED U/S 68 OF THE ACT. DURING APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSI ONS AS UNDER: ' THE LEARNED AO HELD THAT DIFFERENCE OF RS 8,24,88 7.24/- BETWEEN CASH AND BALANCE AS A SHOWN IN THE REVISED STATEMEN T OF AFFAIRS ALONG WITH FRESH RETURN FILED IN RESPOND TO NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 142 (1) AND IN THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS SUB MITTED ALONG WITH ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME IS UNEXPLAINED AND A DDED AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. WITH DUE RESPECT TO THE LEARNED AO WE WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THAT THE CASH BALANCE AND BANK BALANCE ARE REFLECTED IN DEBIT SIDE OF THE STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS AND REPRESENTED ASSETS OR INVE STMENTS. THEY ARE RESULTS OF EITHER INCREASE IN CAPITAL, PROFIT, OR LOAN SECURED OR UNSECURED LOAN. IF CREDIT SIDE INCREASES THE DEB IT SIDE OF STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS WILL AUTOMATICALLY INCREASE. HENCE THE EXCESS CASH OR BANK BALANCE CANNOT BE ADD ED U/S 68 AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT, AS THE SAME NEVER HAD NATU RE OF CREDIT. 21 AS SUBMITTED BY US EARLIER, THAT THE LEARNED AO IS USING PART OF FIGURES OF REVISED STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS AS WHEN HE FOUND SUITABLE TO HIM, THEN COMPARE THEM WITH ORIGINAL STATEMENT OF A FFAIRS, WITHOUT CONSIDERING OTHER PARTS DUE TO WHICH THESE FIGURES ARRIVED, AND ARRIVING AT MISLEADING AND ONE-SIDED CONCLUSIONS. THIS ADDITION IS ONE OF EXAMPLE OF THIS TENDENCY. T HE LEARNED AO USED BALANCE OF REVISED STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS, WITHO UT CONSIDERING EFFECT OF CHANGES IN LIABILITY SIDE OF REVISED STAT EMENT OF AFFAIRS AND JUMPED ON CONCLUSION THAT THERE ARE EXCESS CASH BALANCE SIMILARLY WHILE MAKING ADDITION IN CREDIT SIDE, HE DID NOT CONSIDER DEBIT SIDE OF REVISED STATEMENT AND CONCLUDED THESE CREDIT ARE UNEXPLAINED. SIR, THERE ARE NO EXCESS CASH AND BANK BALANCE IN T ERMS OF REVISED STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS DULY J SUBMITTED BY THE APPELL ANT IN COURSE OF HEARING, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT. THEREFORE THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LEARNED AO ON AC COUNT OF EXCESS CASH AND BANK BALANCE FOUND AS UNEXPLAINED C ASH CREDIT, ARE NEITHER FACTUALLY CORRECT NOR EQUALLY CORRECT | AND THEREFORE YOUR GOOD SELF ARE REQUESTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE AND OBLIGE. 8.2 THE REMAND REPORT OF THE A.O. CALLED FOR ON THE SUBMISSIONS READS AS UNDER: 22 '3.5 CASH AT BANK / HAND-RS.8,24,887/-. IN THE THRE E DIFFERENCE BALANCE SHEETS FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME THE AS SESSEE HAD SHOWN CASH & BANK BALANCE TOTALING RS, 53,603/- (CASH & B ANK BALANCE IS NOT SHOWN SEPARATELY BUT UNDER ONE HEAD). IN THE REVISE D BALANCE SHEET (CONSOLIDATED) THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN BALANCE WITH SBI AT RS. 4,85,731.24 AND CASH IN HAND AT RS. 3,92,759.50 (TOTAL RS. 8,24 ,887.24). THE AO HAS MENTIONED IN THE) ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE BANK ST ATEMENT FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE SHOWS BALANCE OF RS. 4,85,731.24. AS T HE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE AS SHOWN IN ORIGINAL BALANCE ) SHEET AND THE ORIGINAL ONE, THE AO HELD THAT 'THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN/I NCLUDED THESE CREDITS IN HER BALANCE SHEET, THESE CREDIT OF CASH ENTRIES ARE FOUND OUT OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND THE ASSESSEE HAVE NO ANY REASONABLE EXP LANATION FOR THESE CREDITS. ' ACCORDINGLY HE INVOKED SECTION 68 OF THE ACT AND ADDED THE ENTIRE BALANCE OF RS. 8,24,887/-, OBVIOUSLY AS I SH OWN IN THE REVISED BALANCE SHEET. THE ARGUMENTS BEFORE YOU VIDE PARA H (PAGE 11) OF W RITTEN SUBMISSIONS DATED 22.8.2007 ARE THAT 'CASH BALANCE AND BANK BALANCE ARE REFLECTED IN DEBIT SIDE OF THE STATEMENT OF AFF AIRS AND REPRESENTED ASSETS OR INVESTMENT. THEY ARE RESULT O F EITHER INCREASE IN CAPITAL, PROFIT, OR LOAN, SECURED OR UNSECURED. IF CREDIT SIDE INCREASES THE DEBIT SIDE OF STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS WITH AUTOMAT ICALLY INCREASE, HENCE EXCESS CASH & BANK BALANCE CANNOT BE ADDED UNDER SE CTION 68 AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT, AS THE SAME NEVER HAVE THE NATURE OF CREDIT'. THIS GOES ON TO SAY THAT AO IS USING PAR OF FIGURES OF R EVISED STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS AS FOUND SUITABLE TO HIM, THEN COMPARE THEM WITH OR IGINAL STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS, WITHOUT CONSIDERING OTHER PART DUE TO WHIC H THESE FIGURES ARRIVED AND ARRIVED AT A MISLEADING AND ONE SIDED C ONCLUSION. 23 THE EARLIER PART OF THE ARGUMENT IS JUST PRINCIPLE OF ACCOUNTANCY WHICH NEEDS NO COMMENT, HERE AGAIN THE AO CONSIDERED THE FIGURE OF RS. 20 LACS AS SHOWN IN ORIGINAL ACCOUNTS WHEREAS FOR THE WHOLE ASSESSMENT PURPOSE HE CONSIDERED THE REVISED RETURN AND THE REVISED BALAN CE SHEET. NEEDLESS TO POINT OUT THAT SECTION 68 APPLIES TO 'CREDIT' AND N OT DEBITS. CASH & BANK BALANCE COMES IN ASSET (DR.) SIDE OF THE BALANCE SH EET. THE AO HIMSELF STATES IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE BANK BALANC E SHOWN IN THE REVISED BALANCE SHEET TALLIES WITH THE BANK STATEMENT. I HAVE EXAMINED THE CASH BOOK OF THE ASSESSEE BUT I COULD NOT FIND ANY ENTRY WHICH CAN BE SAID TO BE OF FURIOUS NATURE AND WHICH BROUGHT THE CASH BALANCE AT RS. 3,02,688/-. ON THE ONE HAND THE AO I S ADDING VARIOUS AMOUNTS SHOWN IN THE LIABILITY SIDE OF THE BALANCE SHEET AND ON THE OTHER HAND THE BANK & CASH BALANCE APPEARING IN THE BALAN CE SHEET. IT IS ALSO NOT THE CASE THAT THERE IS DIFFERENCE IN BANK BALAN CE AS SHOWN IN THE BALANCE AND THAT APPEARING IN THE BANK STATEMENT, H AVING REGARD TO THESE FACTS, IN MY VIEW, I THE ADDITION OF RS. 8,24,887/- IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 8.3 AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAME WHERE THE A.O. HIMSE LF HAS MENTIONED THAT THIS ADDITION IS NOT JUSTIFIED, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION. 8.4 BEFORE US, BOTH THE PARTIES HAVE REITERATED SAM E AND SIMILAR ARGUMENTS. NO IMPROVEMENT WAS MADE WITH REGARD TO OBSERVATIONS OF THE A.O. MADE IN REMAND REPORT. WHEN THE A.O. HIMS ELF HAS STATED IN REMAND REPORT THAT THIS ADDITION IS NOT JUSTIFIED, THUS, THERE IS NO 24 QUESTION OF MAKING ADDITION AND THERE IS NO REASON TO RAISE THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS GROUND NO. 6 OF REVENUES APPEAL. 9 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISS ED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 11 TH JUNE, 2014). SD/- SD/- (N.K.SAINI) (HARI OM MARATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R DATED : 11 TH JUNE, 2014. VL COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE LD.CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE D.R ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, JODHPUR.