ITO, Gwalior V. Smt. Jagdish Kaur Anand, Kannauj

ITA 473/AGR/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6824 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 22-06-2010
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 14-12-2007
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R C SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.473/AGR/2007 ASST. YEAR: 2004-05 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1) VS. SMT. JAGDISH KA UR ANAND, GWALIOR. 4, HEM KUNT COLONY, NEW DELHI 110 043. (PAN : ABNPA 3658 A). (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.C. SHARMA, JR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PANKAJ GARGH, ADVOCATE ORDER PER P.K. BANSAL, A.M.: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DATED 17.08.2007 BY TAKING THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUND S OF APPEAL:- (1) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED, IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.630181/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS BECAUSE A PLAIN READING OF PARA-3 OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12.06 CLEARLY REVEALS THAT THOUGH AN OPPOR TUNITY WAS AFFORDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS OF RS.6,30,181/- B UT SHE FAILED TO BRING ON RECORD ANY MATERIAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE DEPOSITS. (2) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED, IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,00,000/- MADE BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS IN PURCHASE OF BONDS BEC AUSE IN THE BALANCE SHEET FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDED ON 31.3.04 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 04-05. NO LOAN APPEARS AS SUCH THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) THAT THE BOND WAS PURCHASED OUT OF MONEY RECEIVED FROM HER HUSBAND SHRI C.S. ANAND IS NOT CORRECT. 3) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED, IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.30,540/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ON KVP MERELY RELAYING ON THE ASSESSEES S UBMISSION THAT THE SAID AMOUNT HAS ALREADY SHOWN IN HER RETURN OF INCOME BE CAUSE THERE WAS ANOTHER 2 INTEREST OF EQUAL AMOUNT BEING INTEREST ON BANK FDR S WHICH THE ASSESSEE REFLECTED IN HER RETURN OF INCOME AS INTEREST ON BANK FDRS AN D NOT INTEREST ON KVP. 2. THE FACTS RELATING TO GROUND NO.1 ARE THAT THE A .O. NOTED CREDIT OF RS.6,30,181/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAIN ED THAT THE SAID AMOUNT REPRESENTS THE CREDIT OF THE MATURITY AMOUNT OF MEP PURCHASED IN 1995 AND 1997. THE A.O. DID NOT AGREE WITH THE ASSESSEE BUT MADE THE ADDITION. WHEN THE MATTER WE NT BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE CREDIT IS EVIDENTLY THE MATURED VALUE OF THE MEP AND DELETED THE ADDITION. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. NO CO GENT MATERIAL OR EVIDENCE WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE WHICH MAY WARRANT OUR INTERFERENCE IN THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) THAT THE AMOUNT HAS NOT BEEN REPRESENTED THE MATURITY VALUE OF THE MEP. SINCE THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING OF FACT, IN THE ABSENCE OF CONTRARY EVIDENC E BEING BROUGHT ON RECORD, THE FINDING CANNOT BE REVERSED. WE ACCORDINGLY CONFIRM THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A). 4. GROUND NO.2 RELATES TO THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.2,00,000/-. 5. THE FACTS RELATING TO THIS GROUND ARE THAT THE A .O. NOTED THE INVESTMENT OF RS.2,00,000/- IN THE BOND. HE MADE THE ADDITION UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT IGNORING THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNT WAS ADVANCED BY HER HU SBAND SHRI C.S. ANAND WHICH WAS DULY CONFIRMED BY HIM BY GIVING PAN. WHEN THE MATTER WE NT BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE CIT(A) HAS ASKED FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE A.O. ALONG WIT H THE CONFIRMATION BUT NO REMAND REPORT WAS SENT BY THE A.O. THE CIT(A), THEREFORE, DELETED TH E ADDITION. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y CONSIDERED THE SAME ALONG WITH THE ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW. NO COGENT MAT ERIAL OR EVIDENCE WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE WHICH MAY WARRANT OUR INTERFERENCE IN THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE 3 HAS DULY SUBMITTED THE CONFIRMATION OF HER HUSBAND ALONG WITH THE PAN WHICH FACT HAS NOT BEEN DENIED BY THE LD. D.R. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,00,000/-. 7. GROUND NO.3 RELATES TO THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.30,540/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST FROM KISAN VIKAS PATRA. THE A.O. WAS OF THE VIEW T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN INTEREST ON KISAN VIKAS PATRA AMOUNTING TO RS.30,540/-. HE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION THAT THE KISAN VIKAS PATRA MATURED ON 01.03.2004 AN D THE INTEREST INCOME HAS ALREADY BEEN REFLECTED IN THE RETURNED INCOME. WHEN THE MATTER WENT BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE DETAILS ALONG WITH THE RETURN WHICH W ERE SENT TO THE A.O. FOR HIS VERIFICATION BUT THE A.O. HAS DENIED THE SAME EVEN THOUGH HE NARRATE D THE FACTS STATED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE CIT(A), THEREFORE, DELETED THE ADDITION. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y CONSIDERED THE SAME. WE NOTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING OF FACTS ON THE BASI S OF THE DOCUMENTS AND PAPERS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE INTEREST INCOME HAS ALREADY I NCLUDED IN THE RETURNED INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE. NO CONTRARY EVIDENCE WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD. IN THE SE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). WE ACCORDINGLY CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STAND S DISMISSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.06.2010). SD/- SD/- (R.K. GUPTA) (P.K. BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: AGRA DATE: 22 ND JUNE, 2010. PBN/* 4 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 ASSIST ANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA TRUE COPY