Raghunandan Tyagi, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Ward-3(5), Hapur

ITA 4311/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5031 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 05-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L ANURAGI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. S . SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4311 /DEL/2018 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2008 - 09 RAGHUNANDAN TYAGI, C/O KAPIL KUMAR GARG (AD VOCATE), C/O COMMERCIAL ADVISORS, 4 - NAVYUG MARKET, GHAZIABAD - 201001 VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3 (5), HAPUR - 245101, UTTAR PRADESH (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A SAPT8128N ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. S. L. ANURAGI , SR. DR DATE OF HEAR ING: 0 4 . 02 .201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05 .02 .201 9 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), MUZAFFARNAGAR DATED 16.03.2017 . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROU NDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(APPEAL), GHAZIABAD HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT. THUS THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (APPEAL) AGAINST APPEAL NO. 191/2016 - 17/GZB ON DATED 29/01/2018 IS BAD IN LAW AND BASED ON WRONG FACTS. 2. THAT THE A.O. (ITO WARD - 3(5) HAPUR) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISALLOWING THE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.6,37,000/ - IN SAVING BANK A/C. THUS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 144(1)/147OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE LD. A.O. ON D ATED 28/3/2016 IS BAD IN LAW AND BASED ON WRONG FACTS/ 3. THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ILL FOR LAST MANY YEARS AND LIVES IN THE VILLAGE ASORA DISTT. HAPUR. IN MOST OF THE DAYS OF THE YEAR, HE USUALLY REMAINED ILL & HOSPITALIZED FOR MEDICAL TREATMENT. THEREFORE, HE COULD NOT PROPERLY ATTEND THE CASE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) AS WELL AS ASSESSING OFFICER (ITO). COPY OF THE ITA NO . 4311 /DEL /201 8 RA GHUNANDAN TYAGI 2 MEDICAL CERTIFICATES OF THE DOCTOR IN THIS REGARD ARE ENCLOSED HEREBY. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT HAD DEPOSITED CA SH RS.21,37,000/ - IN HIS INDIAN BANK SAVING ACCOUNT NO. 728187719 DURING THE AY 2008 - 09 ON VARIOUS DATES BUT THE AO HAD ALLOWED CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.15,00,000/ - ONLY AND ADDED TO INCOME RS.6,37,000/ - IN PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 144(1)/147OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT, 1961. ALTHOUGH, THE CASH DEPOSITED OF RS.6,37,000/ - (21,37,000 - 15,00,000 AS ALLOWED & ACCEPTED BY AO) WAS SELF - EVIDENCED & EXPLAINED. AS THIS WAS DEPOSITED OUT OF THE CASH WITHDRAWN FROM THE SAME BANK A/C ON EARLIER DATES AND THE PAST SAVINGS O F THE APPELLANT OUT OF HIS AGRICULTURE INCOMES. THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT OF CASH DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWN IN OR FROM THE INDIAN BANK SAVING A/C NO. 728187719 IS AS: DATE OF CASH DEPOSIT & WITHDRAWAL CASH DEPOSITS RS. CASH WITHDRAWN RS. SOURCES OF FUNDS TO DE POSIT CASH IN THE BANK & PURPOSE OF WITHDRAWAL 16.04.2007 1,000 - OUT OF THE PAST YEARS SAVINGS OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 17.04.2007 9,00,000 - OUT OF THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND SOLD IN EARLIER YEAR AY 2007 - 08 AND THE AO HAS ALLOWED AND ACCEPTED THE SAME IN HIS ASSESSMENT ORDER BY ALLOWING RS. 15,00,000. 18.04.2007 6,90,000 - 1 . RS. 6,00,000 OUT OF THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND SOLD IN EARLIER YEAR AY 2007 - 08 AND THE AO HAS ALLOWED AND ACCEPTED THE SAME IN HIS AS SESSMENT ORDER BY ALLOWING RS. 15,00,000. 2 . RS. 90,000 OUT OF THE PAST YEARS SAVINGS OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 26.04.2007 - 3,50,000 CASH WITHDRAWN TO KEEP FOR THE FUTURE EMERGENCIES OF ILLNESS OF THE APPELLANT. 27.04.2007 24,000 - OUT OF THE CASH WITHDRAWN RS. 3,50,000 ON DATED 26.04.2007 30.04.2007 - 5,000 TO MEET OUT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. 11.05.2007 8,000 - OUT OF THE CASH WITHDRAWN RS. 3,50,000 ON DATED 26.04.2007 15.05.2007 - 1,500 TO MEET OUT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. 04.06.2007 14,0 00 - OUT OF THE CASH WITHDRAWN RS. 3,50,000 ON DATED 26.04.2007 25.06.2007 - 3,000 TO MEET OUT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. ITA NO . 4311 /DEL /201 8 RA GHUNANDAN TYAGI 3 28.06.2007 - 1,000 30,000 TO MEET OUT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES. 16.07.2007 - 2,000 TO MEET OUT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES 21.07.2007 - 21 ,000 TO MEET OUT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES 30.07.2007 - 10,000 TO MEET OUT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES 04.08.2007 - 15,000 TO MEET OUT THE HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES 12.09.2007 - 2,00,000 CASH WITHDRAWN TO KEEP FOR THE FUTURE EMERGENCIES OF ILLNESS OF THE APPELLANT. 24.01.2008 5,00,000 1 . RS. 3,00,000 OUT OF THE REMAINING CASH IN HAND WHICH WAS OUT OF THE WITHDR A WAL ON DATED 26.04.2007 [350000 - 24000 - 8000 - 14000 AS WAS DEPOSITED EARLIER] 2 . RS. 2,00,000 OUT OF THE CASH WITHDRAWN ON DATED 12.09.2007 TOTAL 21,37,000 6,38, 500 5. THAT THE SUMMARY OF SOURCES OF FUNDS TO DEPOSIT RS. 6,37,000 IN THE BANK A/C BY THE APPELLANT IS AS: A. SOURCES OF FUNDS 6,38, 500 - CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM THE BANK A/C - AS PER ABOVE TABLE IN 4. 91,000 - PAST YEARS SAVINGS OF THE APPELLANT OUT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOMES 7,29,500 - SOURCES OF FUNDS - [A] B. UTILIZATION OF FUNDS 6, 37 , 0 00 - CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK A/C - AS PER ABOVE TABLE IN 4. 92,500 - UTILIZED IN HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES 7,29,500 - UTILIZATION OF FUNDS - [B] 6. THAT AS PER THE ABOVE DETAILS OF SOURCES & UTILIZATION OF FUNDS, IT IS EVIDENTLY PROVED AND EXPLAINED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD SUFFICIENT CASH AVAILABILITY WITH HIM AND, OUT OF WHICH, HE HAD DEPOSITED CASH OF RS.6,37,000 IN HIS INDIAN BANK SAVING A/C. THEREFORE, THE LD. CI1 (APPEAL) HAS ERRED TO DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT AS WELL AS THE AO HAS ALSO ERRED TO ADD RS.6,37,000 IN THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 7. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR DELETE THE GROUNDS HEREIN ABOVE TAKEN ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING. TH E APPELLANT, THEREFORE, MOST RESPECTFULLY PRAYS THAT HIS APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE ALLOWED AND DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.6,37,000/ - . ITA NO . 4311 /DEL /201 8 RA GHUNANDAN TYAGI 4 3. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING. THE BENCH WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE CAN BE DISPOSED OFF IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL WAS HEARD EX - PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE AND DISPOSED OFF CONSIDERING SUBMISSION OF THE LD. DR. IT IS OBSERVED FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED BY THE CIT(A) ON 27.10.2017, 08.12.2017, 05.01.2018 AND 05.01.2018. 4. WHEN QUESTIONED BY THE BENCH, THE LD. DR HAD NO OBJECTION TO RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). 5. IN THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, I AM OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE ALLOW ED ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT ITS APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). HENC E, I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH AFTER ALLOWING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . (ORDER PRO N OUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 /0 2 /2019). SD/ - (N. S . SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 05 /02/2019 *SUBODH*