Smt. Meenu Gupta, Bhopal V. The Commissiner of Income Tax, Bhopal

ITA 39/IND/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7523 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KESHAV SAXENA
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, J.M. AND SHRI R.C.SHARM A, A.M. PAN NO. : ACJPG8572C I.T.A.NO. 39/IND/2011 A.Y. : 2006 - 07 SMT. MEENU GUPTA, CIT, 36, SECTOR 1, SHAKTI NAGAR, BHOPAL. VS BHOP AL. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI KESHAV SAXENA DATE OF HEARING : 05.01. 201 2 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06 . 0 2 .201 2 O R D E R PER R. C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT PASSED U/S 263 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, 30 TH MARCH, 2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS IN SUPPO RT OF THE CONTENTION THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSE SSING -: 2: - 2 OFFICER WAS NEITHER ERRONEOUS NOR PREJUDICIAL TO TH E INTERESTS OF REVENUE, THEREFORE, CIT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN INVOKI NG THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 263 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 19 61. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, CONTENTION OF THE LD. CIT DR WAS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT MADE ANY INQUIRY WITH REGARD TO THE TRANSACTION OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY VAL UED AT RS. 30 LAKHS BUT SHOWN AT RS. 12.50 LAKHS. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAS ALSO NOT MADE ANY INQUIRY WITH REGARD TO THE SO URCE OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, WHILE MAKING PAYM ENT FOR THE SAID TRANSACTION. ALL THESE THINGS HAVE MADE TH E ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOT ONLY ERRONEOUS BUT ALSO P REJUDICIAL TO THE INTERESTS OF THE REVENUE, THEREFORE, THE LD. CI T WAS JUSTIFIED IN INVOKING THE POWERS U/S 263 AND SETTIN G ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO REFRAME ASSESSMENT AFTER VERIFYING ALL THE FACTS MENTIONED IN AIR DATA, BANK ACCOUNT ETC. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. CIT DR, WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY ASSESSEE AND ALSO GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FOU ND THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE H AD ENTERED -: 3: - 3 INTO TRANSACTION OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY VALUED AT RS . 30 LAKHS, WHICH CAME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF DEPARTMENT AS PER AI R INFORMATION. HOWEVER, WHILE FRAMING ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3), THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT MADE ANY INQUIRY WITH REGARD TO THE TRANSACTIONS SO ENTERED BY THE ASSESSEE NOR MAD E ANY EFFORT TO FIND OUT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT FOR PURCHASE OF SAID PROPERTY. NOT A SINGLE WORD HAS BEEN UTTERED BY ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE A SSESSMENT ORDER TO SHOW THAT HE HAS MADE EFFORTS OR INQUIRY TO FIND OUT THE TRUTH OF ALL THESE FACTS. NON MAKING INQUIRY AN D PASSING ORDER WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND RENDERS THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER NOT ONLY ERRONEOUS BUT ALSO PREJU DICE IS CAUSED TO THE REVENUE IN SO FAR AS TRANSACTIONS OF THE VALUE OF MORE THAN RS. 30 LAKHS WAS SHOWN AT RS. 12.50 LAKHS ONLY. FURTHERMORE, NO WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED HU GE DEPOSIT OF CASH IN HER BANK ACCOUNT TOTALING TO RS. 18 LAKHS. WE, THEREFORE, INCLINE TO AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. CIT DR THAT NON MAKING OF ANY INQUIRY WITH REGARD T O THE PARTICULAR INFORMATION BROUGHT TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE DEPARTMENT AND PASSING THE ORDER WITHOUT APPLICATIO N OF -: 4: - 4 MIND, HAS RENDERED THE ORDER NOT ONLY ERRONEOUS BUT ALSO PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTERESTS OF REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH FEBRUARY 2012. (JOGINDER SINGH) ( R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 6 TH FEBRUARY, 2012. CPU* 1.2