M/s TCY Learning Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana V. ITO, W-7(2), Ludhiana

ITA 394/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0030 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDRA KANTA
• Assessee Lawyers: VIKRANT KACKRIA
• Keywords: Gift; Income from undisclosed sources

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, SMC, CHANDIGARH , BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 394/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 M/S TCY LEARNING SOLUTIONS PVT LTD, 436-G, BHAI RANDHIR SINGH NAGAR, LUDHIANA VS. THE ITO, WARD 7(2), LUDHIANA ./PAN NO: AABCT8756G / APPELLANT /RESPONDENT ! /ASSESSEE BY : SH. VIKRANT KACKRIA, ADVOCATE ' ! / REVENUE BY : SMT. CHANDRAKANTA, SR. DR # $ % /DATE OF HEARING : 15.05.2019 &'() % / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.05.2019 / ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2018 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX(APPEALS)-4, LUDHIANA [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)]. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAS AGITATED THE ACT ION OF THE CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF 13,70,000/- AS UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR RECEIVED INV ESTMENT IN THE SHARE CAPITAL AMOUNTING TO ABOUT 98,00,000/- FROM DIFFERENT PERSONS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALLED FOR THE NECESSARY DETAILS AND EVIDENCES FROM THE ITA NO. 394-C-2018- M/S TCY LEARNING SOLUTIONS LTD., LUDHIANA 2 ASSESSEE REGARDING THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS A ND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE REQUISITE DETAILS INCLUDING THE COPIES OF THE INCOME TAX RETURNS, BANK ACCOUNTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND FINANCIAL CAPACITY OF THE IN VESTOR AND ALSO FILED THE CONFIRMATION FROM THE INVESTORS TO PROVE THE GE NUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. 3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER EXAMINING THE DETAIL S ACCEPTED THE TRANSACTIONS AS GENUINE IN RESPECT OF OTHER PERSONS EXCEPT ONE SHRI SANJEEV KATARIA WHO HAD INVESTED 20.48 LACS IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. EVEN IN THE CASE OF SAID SHRI SANJEEV KATARIA, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCEPTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS RELATI NG TO INVESTMENT OF 6,30,000/-. HOWEVER, IN RESPECT OF THE REMAINING A MOUNT OF 14,18,000/- THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THE AS SESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION OF THE SOURCE OF T HE AFORESAID AMOUNT. HE, ACCORDINGLY, TREATED THE AFORESAID AMOUNT OF 14.18 LACS AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE FIRST APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ACC EPTED THE INVESTMENT OF 48,000/- BY THE SAID SANJEEV KATARIA AS GENUINE, H OWEVER, HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION OF 13.70 LACS AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 394-C-2018- M/S TCY LEARNING SOLUTIONS LTD., LUDHIANA 3 5. BEFORE US, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBM ITTED THAT TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND SOURCE OF THE INVESTOR, SHRI SANJEEV KATARIA WAS PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHO IN HIS ST ATEMENT CONFIRMED ABOUT THE TRANSACTION AND ALSO EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF HIS FUNDS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER ENQUIRED ABO UT THE SOURCE OF SOURCE I.E REGARDING SOME AMOUNT RECEIVED AS LOAN / GIFTS BY THE SAID SHRI SANJEEV KATARIA FROM OTHER PERSONS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE BURDEN LIES UPON ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INVE STOR. THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BRING EVIDENCE OF SOURCE OF SOUR CE. HE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A) A ND FURTHER DEMONSTRATED THAT EVEN SHRI SANJEEV KATARAIA HAS AL SO PRODUCED HIS BANK ACCOUNT DETAILS TO SHOW THE SOURCE OF HIS FUND S WHICH WERE FURTHER INVESTED IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT SUMMON O THER PERSONS FROM WHOM THE SAID SANJEEV KATARIA HAD RECEIVED THE GIFT / LOAN ETC. WITHOUT EXAMINING THE OTHER PERSONS WHO HAD GIVEN LOAN / GIFT TO SANJEEV KATARIA, IT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED FOR THE ASSE SSING OFFICER TO HOLD THAT THOSE TRANSACTIONS WERE NOT GENUINE. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ROUTED HIS OWN MONEY INTO THE SYSTEM. ALL THE TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN DONE THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. EVEN THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS NOT DOUBTED THE TRANSACTIONS OF THE REMAINING INVES TMENT OF 84 LACS ITA NO. 394-C-2018- M/S TCY LEARNING SOLUTIONS LTD., LUDHIANA 4 MADE BY OTHER PARTIES. EVEN IN THE CASE OF SHRI SAN JEEV KATARIA ALSO, THE INVESTMENT UP TO ABOUT 7 LACS HAS ALSO BEEN SAID TO BE GENUINELY EXPLAINED. MERELY BECAUSE SHRI SANJEEV KATARIA HAD TAKEN CERTAIN UNSECURED LOANS, WHICH WERE ALSO RETURNED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS TO THOSE PERSONS, IS NOT ENOUGH TO HOLD THAT THE TRANS ACTION WAS NOT GENUINE. IN VIEW OF THE THIS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICAT ION ON THE PART OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES FOR MAKING THE IMPUGNED ADDI TION. THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY ORDERED TO BE DELETED. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.05.2019. SD/- ( / SANJAY GARG) / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 24.05.2019 .. '+ ,- .- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. # / / CIT 4. # / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -01 2 , % 2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 15 7$ / GUARD FILE '+ # / BY ORDER, 8 ' / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR