Virender Kuamar Dhingra, V. DCIT, CC-4,

ITA 456/DEL/2006

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86720 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 year(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 12-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2006
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J P CHANDRAKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: A MOITRA
• Section: 147; 131; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. I. P. BANSAL , JM AND SH. N. K. SAINI, AM ITA NO. 456/DEL/2006 : ASSTT. YEAR : 1996 - 97 MR. VIRENDAR KUMAR DHING RA, B - 183, GREATER KAILASH - I, NEW DELHI - 110048 VS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 4, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A AHPD4469R ASSESSEE BY : SH. A. MOITRA, CA REVENUE BY : SH. J. P. CHANDRAKAR , SR. DR D ATE OF HEARING : 12 .02 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 .02 .2015 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.12.2005 OF LD. CIT(A) - XVII, NEW DELHI . 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS. 4,00,000/ - BEING THE LOAN GIVEN BY SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THIS CASE WAS REOPENED U/S 147 R.W.S. 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED T O AS THE ACT). IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.03.2003 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS. 95,430/ - . THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED LOAN OF RS. 17, 00,000/ - . HE ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE ITA NO . 456 /DEL /2006 VIRENDAR KUMAR DHIN GRA 2 SOURCE OF THE SAID LOANS . THE AO CONSIDERED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AS VAGUE AND TREATED THE LOANS OF RS. 17,00,000/ - AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) WHO DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 13,00,000/ - I.E. THE LOAN OF RS. 8,00,000/ - FROM SH. K. S. DHINGRA AND RS. 5,00,000/ - FROM SH. SANJEEV KRISHEN. AS REGARDS TO THE REMAINING ADDITION OF RS. 4 ,00,000/ - SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A). THE F ACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED RS. 4,00,000/ - AND CLAIMED THAT THE AMOUNT WAS ERRONEOUSLY CREDITED IN THE ACCOUNT OF M/S RAJNI CONSTRUCTIONS. LATER ON, THE ASSESSEE PRESUMED THAT THE AMOUNT WAS NOT RECEIVED FROM THE SAID FIRM BUT FROM MR. SUMANT PASRICHA, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE UPON DISCUSSION WITH MR. SUMANT PASRICHA DISCOVERED THAT THE AMOUNT HAD NOT BEEN RECEIVED FROM HIM, HE INVESTIGATED FURTHER AND EVENTUALLY WAS ABLE TO GAUGE FROM HIS BANK ACCO UNT THAT THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED FROM SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA VIDE CHEQUE DATED 19.09.1995 FROM HIS BANK A/C NO. 70189 OF SBI, LAJPAT NAGAR, RING ROAD BRANCH, NEW DELHI. SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA WHO WAS A PILOT MIGHT HAVE LEFT THE COUNTRY FOR PROFESSIONAL P URPOSES, THEREFORE COULD NOT BE CONTACTED. THE AO ISSUED THE SUMMONS U/S 131 OF THE ACT TO SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA BUT THE SAME REMAINED UNCOMPILED. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,00,000/ - WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ALONGWITH OTHER ADDITIONS . BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT A COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF ITA NO . 456 /DEL /2006 VIRENDAR KUMAR DHIN GRA 3 SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA HAD ALREADY BEEN PLACED ON RECORD WHICH REVEALED THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 4,00,000/ - WAS DEBITED ON 19.09.1995 TO HIS BA NK ACCOUNT. IT WAS STATED THAT SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA WAS HAVING SUFFICIENT FUNDS IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT AND FILED THE CONFIRMATION ACKNOWLEDGING THE LOAN OF RS. 4,00,000/ - AND HAD GIVEN INCOME TAX PARTICULARS NAMELY PAN, WARD NUMBER AND ALSO BANK STATEMENT. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MAY BE DELETED. THE RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: CIT VS SOPHIA FINANCE LTD. (1994) 205 ITR 98 (DEL.) CIT VS MAKHNI AND TYAGI (P) LTD. (2004) 267 ITR 433 5 . THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO ASKED THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE A O WHO STATED THAT IN RESPONSE TO THE SUMMON U/S 131 OF THE ACT , SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA NEITHER FILED ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSION NOR APPEARED FOR ADJOURNMENT, T HEREFORE, THE FACTS REMAINED THE SAME AND THE CREDIT ENTRY OF RS. 4,00,000/ - REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. T HE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND REMAND REPORT OF THE AO SUSTAINED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. 6 . NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPE AL. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE CONFIRMATION FROM THE DEPOSITOR , COPY OF HIS BANK STATEMENT AND PARTICULARS OF HIS PAN ALONGWITH INFORMATION OF THE ITA NO . 456 /DEL /2006 VIRENDAR KUMAR DHIN GRA 4 INCOME TAX WARD WHERE HE WAS ASSESSED. HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS PAGE NO. 22 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH IS THE COPY OF THE BANK PASS BOOK OF SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA AND STATED THAT THE AM OUNT OF RS. 4,00,000/ - WAS DEB ITED IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITO R SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA . H E ALSO STATED THAT THE SAID AMOUNT WAS REPAID TO SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE AMOUNT WAS DEBITED IN T HE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THIS PURPOSE, O UR ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TOWARDS PAGE NO. 23 OF THE ASSESSE E S COMPILATION. HE, ACCORDINGLY, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DISCHARGED THE ONUS CAST UPON HIM FOR PROVING THE IDENTITY OF THE DEPOSITOR , HIS CREDITWORTHINESS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. T HEREFORE, THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. 7 . IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND REITERATED THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 10.03.2004 AND BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 8 . WE HAVE CO NSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE INITIALLY STATED THAT RS. 4,00,000/ - WAS RECEIVED FROM MR. SUMANT PASRICHA AND WRONGL Y CREDITED TO M/S RAJNI CONSTRUCTIONS. LATER ON, THE ASSESSEE ON INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT THE LOAN OF RS. 4,00,000/ - WAS RECEIVED FROM SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA THROUGH ITA NO . 456 /DEL /2006 VIRENDAR KUMAR DHIN GRA 5 CHEQUE. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE CONFIRMATION FROM SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA AND ALSO COP Y OF HIS BANK ACCOUNT WHICH REVEALED THAT RS. 4,00,000/ - WAS DEBITED IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT ON 19.09.1995 , COPY OF THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT IS PLACED AT PAGE NO. 22 OF THE ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK. THE SAID AMOUNT WAS ALSO REPAID VIDE CHEQUE NO. 242720 ON 19.05.200 6 WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGE NO. 23 OF THE ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK. THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE AMOUNT FROM SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA AND REPAID THE SAME TO HIM THROUGH BANKI NG CHANNEL. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED THE CONFIRMA TION OF SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA, COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGE NO. 22 OF ASSESSEE S COMPILATION , IN THE SAID CONFIRMATION , I T IS MENTIONED THAT HE I S REGULARLY ASSESSED AT CIRCLE 44(1) HAVING PAN NO. AD BPD7259 A.THE ADDITION IN THE PRESENT CASE WAS MADE ONLY ON THIS BASIS THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA. H OWEVER, THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA WAS A PILOT AND MIGHT HAVE LEFT THE COUNTRY FOR PROFESS IONAL PURPOSES HAD NOT BEEN REBUTTED. IN THE PRESENT CASE IT IS NOTICED FROM THE COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT OF SH. IQBAL SINGH DHINGRA WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGE NO. 22 OF THE ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK THAT HE WAS HAVING A CREDIT BALANCE OF RS. 22, 05,919/ - BEFORE ISSUI NG THE CHEQUE AMOUNTING TO RS. 4,00,000/ - ON 19.09.1995 TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THAT SH. IQBAL ITA NO . 456 /DEL /2006 VIRENDAR KUMAR DHIN GRA 6 SINGH DHINGRA ( THE DEPOSITOR ) WAS HAVING SUFFICIENT BALANCE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, HIS CREDITWORTHINESS WAS PROVED AND SINCE HE WAS ASSESSE D TO WARD 44(1) HAVING PAN NO. ADBPD7259A, THEREFORE, HIS IDENTITY WAS ALSO NOT DOUBTED . T HE AMOUNT IN QUESTION WAS RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE AND IT WAS ALSO REPAID VIDE CHEQUE NO. 242720 DATED 19.05.2006 OF ANDHRA BANK, GREATER KAILASH - I, NEW DELHI, THEREFO RE, THE TRANSACTION WAS GENUINE. AS SUCH THE ASSESSEE DISCHARGED THE ONUS CAST UPON HIM FOR PROVING THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR , HIS CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO AND SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT( A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. IN VIEW OF THE MATTER WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON THIS ISSUE AND THE IMPUGNED ADDITION IS DELETED. 9 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 12 /02 /2015 ) SD/ - SD/ - (I. P. BANSAL ) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 12 /02 /2015 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR