Vimal Chandra Jha, V. Income-tax Officer,

ITA 411/PUN/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1282 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 10 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S P WALIMBE
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, PUNE (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM . / ITA NO.411/PUN/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 VIMAL CHANDRA JHA, QUARTER NO.2076, SECTOR NO.12-D, BOKARAO STEEL CITY, JHARKHAND- 827012. PAN : AFZPJ1494B ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. ITO (CENTRAL) II, PUNE. / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRATIK SANDBHOR REVENUE BY : SHRI S. P. WALIMBE / DATE OF HEARING : 04.02.2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.02.2021 / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-13, PUNE (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 06.11.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE APPELLANT IS WORKING AS AN AGENT FOR EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT FOR SHORT) WAS CARRIED ON THE APPELLANT ON 07.08.2009. THE APPELLANT HAD NOT BEEN FILING RETURNS OF INCOME VOLUNTARILY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2007-08. HOWEVER, BASED ON THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 153A OF THE ACT, THE RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2 ITA NO.411/PUN/2016 2004-05 TO 2010-11 WERE FILED ON 11.04.2011. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 WAS FILED SHOWING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,87,310/- IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT. DURING COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 153A OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE FOLLOWING CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT :- DATE AMOUNT (RS.) 03-04-2006 40,000 26-05-2006 7,000 22-06-2006 33,000 24-06-2006 49,500 17-07-2011 20,000 30-10-2006 35,000 TOTAL 1,84,500/- THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE APPELLANT HAD NOT ACCEPTED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ACCORDINGLY, MADE ADDITION OF RS.1,84,500/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS. 3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1,40,061/- ON ACCOUNT OF LOW WITHDRAWALS FOR PERSONAL PURPOSES AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT VIDE ORDER DATED 30.12.2011 U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHO VIDE HIS IMPUGNED ORDER CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, 3 ITA NO.411/PUN/2016 6. BEFORE US, IT IS CONTENDED THAT THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS DOES NOT EMANATE OUT OF THE SEIZED MATERIAL AND CONSEQUENTLY NO ADDITION U/S 153A OF THE ACT CAN BE MADE IN THE ABSENCE OF ABATEMENT OF THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WITH SEARCH ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. CIT-DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 8. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS WERE MADE PURSUANT TO THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NOT REFERRED TO ANY SEIZED MATERIAL BASED ON WHICH THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS WERE MADE. FURTHER, WE NOTICE THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.1,84,500/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IS TOO MEAGRE TO DISBELIEVE THAT ONE DOES NOT POSSESS A SUM OF RS.1,84,500/- ESPECIALLY KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT HAD ALREADY RETURNED TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,87,310/-. SIMILARLY, AS REGARDS TO THE ADDITION OF RS.1,40,061/- ON ACCOUNT OF LOW WITHDRAWALS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD ANY MATERIAL TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE REQUIRES A SUM OF RS.1,40,061/- TO MEET ITS PERSONAL EXPENDITURE. NOR IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. IN THE ABSENCE OF THIS FINDING, WE ARE UNABLE TO UPHOLD THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF LOW WITHDRAWALS. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.1,84,500/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS AND THE 4 ITA NO.411/PUN/2016 ADDITION OF RS.1,40,061/- ON ACCOUNT OF LOW WITHDRAWALS. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 04 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (INTURI RAMA RAO) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 04 TH FEBRUARY, 2021. SUJEET / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)-13, PUNE. 4. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL), PUNE. 5. , , , / DR, ITAT, A BENCH, PUNE. 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE.