ITo, Gwalior V. Shri Gagan Bhalla, Gwalior

ITA 422/AGR/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7043 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 04-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: MANUJ SHARMA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 142(1); 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.422/AGR/2009 ASST. YEAR: 2005-06 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SHRI GAGAN BHALLA, WARD 1(1), GWALIOR. 56, ADARSH COLONY, 202, KASHI MANSION, LALITPUR COLONY, LASHKAR, GWALIOR. (PAN: AGFPB 8608 J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.K. SHARMA, JR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANUJ SHARMA, ADVOCATE ORDER PER P.K. BANSAL, AM : THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 02.07.2009 PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND :- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.12,09,450/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT/TRANSACTION. 2. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN DISPUTE ON 28.03.2006 DECLAR ING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,02,470/- WHICH WAS PROCESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 14 3(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SELECTED THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR SCRUTINY ON THE BASIS OF AIR INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM CIT (CIB) BHOPAL THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D DEPOSITED RS.12,09,450/- IN SAVING BANK 2 ACCOUNT IN IDBI BANK DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2005 -06. A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) WAS ISSUED. AS PER ASSESSING OFFICER, THE SAID NOTICE W AS NOT RESPONDED AS NO RETURN WAS FILED BY ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETE D THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT AND, ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECO RD, MADE THE ADDITION OF 12,09,450/- AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN BANK DEPOSITS. AGGRIEVE D BY THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHO PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE. NOW, THE REVENUE IS AGGRIE VED BY THE SAME AND FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. D.R. RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LEARNED AR, ON THE OTHER HAND, RELYING UPON THE ORD ER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE THE ADDITION IN DISP UTE ONLY ON THE BASIS OF ONE INFORMATION WHICH HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. THERE FORE, THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE DESERVES TO BE CANCELLED. HE FURTHER STATED THAT THE LD. FIRST AP PELLATE AUTHORITY HAS RIGHTLY APPRECIATED THE EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH THE RETURN O F INCOME AND DELETED THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE. HE REQUESTED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE M AY BE DISMISSED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE CAR EFULLY CONSIDERED THE SAME. WE NOTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS THOROUGHLY GONE THROUGH THE BAN K STATEMENT AND ALSO THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS RECORDED A FINDING THAT THE DEPOSI TS IN THE BANK RELATED TO THE BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS & PEAK WAS ALSO OF RS.85,000/- WHICH I S WELL COVERED EVEN BY THE RETURNED INCOME SHOWN AT RS.1,02,470/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS F AILED TO CONSIDER THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY ASSESSEE AS THE SAME COULD NOT BE LINKED TO ASSE SSMENT RECORDS AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED EXPARTE U/S. 144 OF THE ACT. THE CIT(A) H AS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IN THE REMAND 3 REPORT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CONFIRMED THESE F ACTS ATTENDING TO THE CASE. THE FINDINGS REACHED BY THE LD. CIT(A) HAVING BEEN BASED ON MATE RIAL AND EVIDENCE ON RECORD AND HAVING NOT BEEN PROVED TO BE PERVERSE ON FACTS, WE FIND NO REA SON TO INTERFERE WITH THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON THIS COUNT. THEREFORE, THE GROUND RAISED IN REVENUE S APPEAL DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06.05.11. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (P.K. BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 6 TH MAY, 2011 AKS/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT BY ORDER 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA BENCH, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL, AGRA