ITO, New Delhi V. Sh. Madan Lal Sharma, New Delhi

ITA 464/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9969 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 29-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 27-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PEEYUSH SONKAR SENIOR
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.464/DEL./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ITO, WARD 27 (3), VS. SHRI MADAN LAL SHARMA, NEW DELHI. SHOP NO.7372, VILLAGE BADUSARAI, P.O. CHHAWLA, NEW DELHI-110 071. (PAN : BLJPS1107B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI PEEYUSH SONKAR, SENIOR DR ORDER PER B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF CIT (APPEALS)-XXIII, NEW DELHI DATED 9.9.2010. THE GRO UND OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE REVENUE IS AS UNDER :- ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD . CIT (A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.11,29,900/- BY ADMITTING THE EVIDENCE IN CONTRAVENTION TO RULE 46A OF THE I.T. A CT 1961 BY ADMITTING THE SALES REGISTERS WHICH WERE NOT PRODUC ED BEFORE THE A.O. AT TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE RIGHT TO ADD ANY GROUND OF APPEAL. ITA NO.464/DEL./2011 2 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.11,29,900/- BY ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDE NCE. THE REVENUE HAS CONTESTED THAT THE CIT (A) HAS ADMITTED THE ADDITIO NAL EVIDENCE IN CONTRAVENTION TO RULE 46A OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES B Y ADMITTING THE SALES REGISTERS WHICH WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESS ING OFFICER AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 3. NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AFTER HEARING THE REVENUE, WE FIND THAT THE CIT (A) HAS RECORDED THAT THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED CASH OF RS.11,29,900/- IN TH E SAVING BANK ACCOUNT HELD WITH THE SYNDICATE BANK WHICH WERE TREATED AS UNEXP LAINED. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THESE WERE THE SALE PROCEEDS OF HIS RATION SHOP. ASSESSEE WAS HAVING THREE REGISTERS OF SALE AND ONE OF THEM WAS NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED BEFORE TH E CIT (A). THE CIT (A) ASKED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONDUCT THE INQUIRY U/S 250(4). THE ASSESSING OFFICER SUBMITTED THE REPORT AND ASSESSING OFFICER REACHED AT A CONCLUSION THAT AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS/EVIDENCE FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ON DIFFERENT D ATES ARE TALLIED WITH THE SALES MADE DURING THE YEAR. HE CONSENTED THAT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO BE CORRECT. HOWEVER, HE OBJECTED THE A DMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 46A. THE CIT (A) HAS RECORDED THE REASONS AND HAS ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, WE FIND THAT THERE ITA NO.464/DEL./2011 3 WERE SUFFICIENT REASONS FOR NOT PRODUCING THE THIRD SALE REGISTER WHICH WAS PRODUCED IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. THE ASSESSING O FFICER HAS CONSENTED THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE EXPLAINED BY THE SALE PROCEE DS RECORDED IN THESE REGISTERS. IN SUCH A SITUATION, WE FIND NO MERIT I N THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND SUSTAIN THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A). THE GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 29 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2011 AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 29 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2011 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT (A)-XXIII, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.