Sh. Rattan Lal Goyal, Chandigarh V. Addl. CIT, Chandigarh

ITA 396/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6196 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.396/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SHRI RATTAN LAL GOYAL, VS. THE ADDL. CIT, CHANDIGARH RANGE-II, CHANDIGARH PAN NO. ABJPG6917G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ATUL GOYAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AKHILESH GUPTA DATE OF HEARING : 01/07/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.07.2014 ORDER PER T.R.SOOD, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.01.2014 OF CIT (APPEALS), CHANDIGARH. 2. IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOL LOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS ERRON EOUS ON THE FACTS AND IN THE LAW. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUG HT TO HAVE DROPPED THE PROCEEDINGS. 2. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED I N MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 3 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD EXPE NSES. THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH HIS FAMILY MEMBERS, WHO ALL ARE INCOME TAX ASSESSEE, ARE LIVING JOINTLY IN THEIR OW N HOUSE. ALL THE ABOVE FAMILY MEMBERS HAVE FILED THEIR INCOM E TAX RETURNS & HAVE DECLARED RS. 70 LACS APPROX. AS NET INCOME. THEY HAVE MADE WITHDRAWAL FOR HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES TO THE TUNE OF RS. 3 LACS FROM THEIR CURRENT INCOME DURING THE YEAR. 2 THE DETAILS SHALL BE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF HEARI NG. THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES IS W ITHOUT ANY BASE AND AGAINST THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND THAT DURI NG ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO GIVE D ETAILS OF WITHDRAWALS AS WELL AS DETAILS OF VARIOUS EXPENSES. HOWEVER, NO DETAILS WERE FILED. FURTHER, FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE ACCOUNTS, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT NO WITHDRAWALS HAVE BEEN MADE WHICH MEANS NO CASH WAS AVAILABLE FOR HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. ACCORDINGLY, A SUM OF RS. 3 LAKHS WAS EST IMATED AS WITHDRAWALS AND ADDED ACCORDINGLY. 4. ON APPEAL, SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ) HAVE BEEN EXTRACTED AS UNDER:- THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES FOR THE ASSESSEE FAMILY ARE RS. 375000/- WHICH IS SUFFICIENT AND JUST KEEPING IN VI EW OF THE SIZE & STANDARD OF THE FAMILY WHICH IS SIMPLE. ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE ABOVE ASSESSEE FAMILY ARE INCOME TAX ASSESSEE AND HAVE BEEN FILING THEIR INCOME TAX RETURN REGULA RLY SINCE LONG. THE ASSESSEE IS PAYING NO RENT AS THEY ARE JO INTLY LIVING IN THEIR HOUSE NO. 177, SECTOR-19-A, CHANDIGARH. TH ERE ARE NO EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ABOVE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF EDUCATION EXPENSES, NO FOREI GN EXPENSES & NO EXPENSES ON MARRIAGE / FUNCTION / BIR THDAY, ETC. ETC. THEY COPY OF INCOME TAX RETURNS ALONG WIT H COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 -09 IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ENCLOSED HEREWITH. FURTHER THE INFORMATION REGARDING HOUSEHOLD EXPENSE S WAS NEVER INQUIRED NOR DISCUSSED BY THE LD. ASSESSING O FFICER DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT FIND FORCE IN THESE SUBMI SSIONS BECAUSE ACCORDING TO HIM IN THE ORDER SHEET DATED 22.11.2010, IT WAS MENTIONED AS UNDER:- 3 THERE ARE NO WITHDRAWALS IN THE BANK A/C OF THE AS SESSEE. ADDITION ON A/C OF LOW WITHDRAWALS TO BE MADE. 6. ACCORDING TO HIM THIS ORDER SHEET IS SINGED BY T HE ADVOCATE OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH MEANS THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LOW HOUSE HOLD WITHDRAWALS WAS ON AGREED BASIS. FURTHER, IT WAS MERELY STATED THAT RS. 3,75,000/- WAS WITHDRAWN BUT NO DETAILS WERE AVAILABLE. THEREFORE , LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. 7. BEFORE US, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTE D THAT ADDITION WAS NEVER AGREED AND THE NOTING IN THE PROCEEDINGS SHEET QUOT ED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ONLY SHOWS THAT ONLY A QUESTION WAS ASKED . FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS MET THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES OUT OF THE RENTAL INCOM E WHICH WAS NOT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK. HE HAS ALSO FILED CERTAIN DETAILS OF THE EXPENSES. 8. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT ONC E THE ADDITION WAS MADE ON AGREED BASIS THEN ASSESSEE COULD NOT CHALLENGE T HE SAME. 9. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE AGRE E WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. NOTING FROM THE P ROCEEDING SHEET OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER QUOTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) READS AS UNDER:- THERE ARE NO WITHDRAWALS IN THE BANK A/C OF THE AS SESSEE. ADDITION ON A/C OF LOW WITHDRAWALS TO BE MADE. 10. THE ABOVE SHOWS THAT IT WAS MERELY A QUERY BY A SSESSING OFFICER WHICH MAY NOT BE CLEAR TO THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE. IT DOES NOT SHOW THAT ADDITION WAS AGREED UPON. ONCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS EXA MINED THE BANK ACCOUNT FOR WITHDRAWALS HE SHOULD HAVE ALSO EXAMINED WHETHER AN Y CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THAT ACCOUNT WHICH WAS STATED TO BE OUT OF RENT. T HERE IS NO BAR IN USING THE 4 RENTAL INCOME RECEIVED IN CASH FOR MEETING THE HOUS E HOLD EXPENSES. THEREFORE, IN OUR OPINION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUFFICIENT SOURCES IN MEETING HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD . CIT(A) AND DELETE THE ADDITION. 11. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.07.2014 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R.SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMER DATED : 11TH JULY, 2014 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR