Income Tax Officer-I, Faizabad V. Smt. Gunjan Agarwal, Faizabad

ITA 473/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 47323714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P K KAPOOR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 473 /LKW/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR:200 9 10 ITO, - I, FAIZABAD VS. SMT. GUNJAN AGARWAL, 711, REKABGANJ, FAIZABAD 224208. PAN:AFDPA8217R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O.NO. 28 /LKW/201 3 (IN ITA NO. 473 /LKW/201 3 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR:200 9 10 SMT. GUNJAN AGARWAL, 711, REKABGANJ, FAIZABAD 224208. PAN:AFDPA8217R VS. ITO, - I, FAIZABAD (OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SHRI P. K. KAPOOR, C. A. DEPARTMENT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 17/08/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 6 /09/2015 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE C.O. IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THESE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (A) II LUCKNOW DATED 03.04.2013 FOR A.Y. 2009 10. 2 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THREE GROUNDS BUT THE EFFECTIVE GRIEVANCE IS ONLY ONE I.E. DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 83,71,531/ - MADE BY THE A.O. AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT ENTRIES IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT (A). 4. WE HAVE CONS IDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE FIND THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT IN WHICH THE DEPOSITS WERE MADE IS IN THE JOINT NAMES OF THE ASSESSEE AND HER HUSBAND AS PER BANK STATEMENT APPEARING ON PAGES 106 TO 111 OF TH E PAPER BOOK AND THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE IS APPEARING AS FIRST HOLDER AND THE NAME OF SHRI RAJENDRA AGARWAL, HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE AS SECOND HOLDER. UNDER THESE FACTS, IT IS QUITE NATURAL THAT THE A.O. WILL PROCEED ON THIS BASIS THAT THE DEPOSITS IN THI S ACCOUNT IS THE MONEY OF THE ASSESSEE AND IF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS, THE ADDITION HAS TO BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. BUT IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT IN QUESTION I S IN JOINT NAMES OF HER AND HER HUSBAND BUT THE AMOUNT IN THIS ACCOUNT AND THE TRANSACTIONS ARE BELONGING TO RAJENDRA AGARWAL HUF OF WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS A COPARCENER AND HER HUSBAND IS KARTA. GENERALLY, THE BANK ACCOUNT BELONGING TO A HUF IS OPENED IN TH E BANK IS IN THE NAME OF HUF BUT IF THE ASSESSEE CAN ESTABLISH THAT EVEN IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IN JOINT NAME OF A COPARCENER AND KARTA OF A HUF IS USED TO EFFECT THE TRANSACTION OF THE HUF, THEN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE SAID ACCOUNT AS TO BE EXAMI NED IN THE CASE OF HUF. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOTED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) IN PARA 6 (11) OF HIS ORDER THAT THE DETAILS OF OUTGOINGS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT IN QUESTION AS NOTED BY HIM IN PARA 6 (10) OF HIS ORDER SHOW THAT THE DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT H AVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR THE 3 PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS BEING CARRIED ON BY RAJENDRA AGARWAL HUF. E HAS ALSO GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT IS REFLECTED IN THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE SAID RAJENDRA AGARWAL HUF FOR AY 2009 10 & 2010 11. HE HAS ALSO NOTED THAT OUT OF TOTAL WITHDRAWALS OF RS. 98,93,715/ - , AN AMOUNT OF RS. 85,96,227/ - HAS BEEN REMITTED TO M/S ASIT C. MEHTA COMMODITY SERVICES (P) LTD. AND M/S ASIT C. MEHTA INVESTMENTS INTERMEDIARIES LTD. THROUGH WHOM RAJENDRA AGARWAL HUF HAS BEEN CA RRYING ON BUSINESS OF INTRA DAY TRADING IN COMMODITIES AND SHARES. ON THE BASIS OF THESE FACTS, HE CONCLUDED THAT WHEN THE WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT PERTAIN TO TRANSACTIONS OF RAJENDRA AGARWAL HUF, THE DEPOSITS ALSO AS A COROLLARY PERTAIN TO THE SAME ENTITY. THE LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE COULD NOT CONTROVERT THIS FINDING OF CIT (A) THAT THE WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT PERTAIN TO TRANSACTIONS OF RAJENDRA AGARWAL HUF. THEREFORE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE BECAUS E THE INFERENCE DRAWN BY HIM IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE APPEARS TO BE CORRECT. MOREOVER, THE LEARNED CIT (A) IN PARA 6 (13) OF HIS ORDER HAS HELD THAT THE A.O. SHALL BE FREE TO EXAMINE THE SOURCE OF CASH OF RS. 83,72,531/ - IN THE CASE OF RAJENDRA AGA RWAL HUF. CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE AND IN VIEW OF ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 6. REGARDING THE C.O. OF THE ASSESSEE, WE F IND THAT IN THE C.O., THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SOME TECHNICAL ISSUES SUCH AS VALIDITY OF SELECTION OF THE PRESENT CASE FOR SCRUTINY AND VALIDITY OF THE NOTICE U/S 143 (2) ISSUED BY THE A.O. SINCE, ON MERIT OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O., WE HAVE UPHELD TH E ORDER OF CIT (A) A PER WHICH HE HAS DELETED THE ADDITION, THESE TECHNICAL ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE REMAIN TO BE OF ACADEMIC INTEREST 4 ONLY AND HENCE, WE HOLD THAT NO ADJUDICATION IS CALLED FOR IN RESPECT OF THESE ACADEMIC ISSUES. 7. IN THE RESULT, TH E CO OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 8. IN THE COMBINED RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED AND CO OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 6 /09/2015 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR