Sh. Bhagwant Singh, Patiala V. ACIT, Patiala

ITA 477/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8415 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: K P BAJAJ
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 477/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SHRI BHAGWANT SINGH, VS THE ACIT, 24-A, BACHITTAR NAGAR, CIRCLE, PATIALA. PATIALA. PAN: ACFPS0397B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.P.BAJAJ RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 09.01.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.01.2017 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS)-I, MEERUT CAMP AT PATIALA DATED 28.03.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON THE FOLLO WING GROUNDS : 1. THAT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ID. CIT (A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT RECONCILIATION OF ENTRIES IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN FURNISHED , WHEREAS THE SAME WAS FILED BEFORE THE ID A.O. AND ALSO FILED BEFORE THE CIT ( A ) WITH WR ITTEN SUBMISSIONS. 2. THAT IN VIEW OF THE ELABORATED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, PROOF OF FIRE IN THE SHAPE OF PHOTOGRAPHS, COPIES OF VARIOUS BANK ACCOUN TS FROM WHICH THE WITHDRAWAL OF CASH WAS MADE, RECONCILIATION OF DEPO SITS AND WITHDRAWALS, THE DECISION OF THE ID. CIT(A) IS PERVERSE TO THE F ACTS ON RECORD AND THE ADDITION SUSTAINED AT 20,72,000/- IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 3. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ON THE BA SIS OF AIR INFORMATION, IT HAS BEEN NOTICED THAT THERE ARE CASH DEPOSITS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 20,72,000/- IN ASSESSEE 'S SAVING BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRO VE GENUINENESS OF THE SOURCE OF THESE DEPOSITS BUT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO ESTABLISH GENUINENESS OF THE SOU RCE OF CASH DEPOSITS. THEREFORE, SAME HAS BEEN ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS NOTED IN THE IMPUGNE D ORDER THAT ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN FABRICATING AND INSTALL ATION OF REMOTE SENSING TOWERS. FOR THE EXECUTION OF THE WO RKS PAYMENTS ARE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM VARIOUS CUSTOMERS BY CHEQUES DRAWN ON VARIOUS BANKS AND FOR REPAYMENT OF THE TERM LOAN, THE AMOUNTS ARE TRANSFE RRED FROM OTHER BANKS TO THE SAVING BARK ACCOUNT NO.7 51 IN ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE, LOWER MALL, PATIALA F ROM WHICH TERM LOAN HAS BEEN AVAILED BY THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THESE FACTS WE RE EXPLAINED BY ASSESSEE IN THE LETTER DATED 02.08.201 1, WHICH IS REPRODUCED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE BRIEFLY EXPLAINED THAT AS REGARDS DEPOSITS IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT, MOST OF THE SOURCES WERE IN TH E SHAPE OF WITHDRAWALS FROM SOME OTHER BANKS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAME DAY WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN GO T RECONCILED EXCEPT ONE DEPOSIT ON 22.08.2008. IT WA S FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUFFICIENT WITH DRAWALS FROM THE BANKS BEFORE SAID DEPOSITS TOOK PLACE. AL L THESE 3 TRANSACTIONS ARE REFLECTED IN SUMMARY OF THE CASH TRANSACTION WITH THE BANKS WHICH HAVE BEEN PLACED O N RECORD. APART FROM ABOVE, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AS SESSEE HAS DECLARED MORE THAN RS. 60 LACS AS RETURNED INCO ME AND AS SUCH, ASSESSEE CAN HAVE A CASH IN HAND OF RS. 4 LACS AT ANY TIME. THEREFORE, INFORMATION UNDER AIR STANDS EXPLAINED AND NO ADDITION SHOULD BE MADE. THE ASSE SSEE EXPLAINED GENUINENESS OF THE SOURCE AND RELIED UPON CERTAIN DECISIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION. TH E ASSESSEE ALSO PLEADED THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DESTROYED IN FIRE. 4. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONSIDERING EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE NOTED THAT IT IS GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THESE ENTRIES WERE RECONCILED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THEREFORE, ONUS UPON ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISCHARGED. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, NOTED T HAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE COPY OF THE RECONCIL IATION OF ENTRIES WHICH WERE CLAIMED TO BE FILED BEFORE ASSES SING OFFICER. IN THE ABSENCE OF RECONCILIATION, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF T HE VIEW THE MATTER REQUIRES E-CONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE'S REPLY HAS BEEN INCORPORATED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN WHICH THE ASS ESSEE EXPLAINED THAT SOURCES OF THE DEPOSIT IN THE BANK A CCOUNT IN THE SHAPE OF WITHDRAWALS FROM SOME OTHER BANKS O F THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAME DAY WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN 4 RECONCILED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REFER RED TO PB- 25 TO 57 WHICH IS RECONCILIATION STATEMENT SHOWING WITHDRAWALS AND DEPOSITS IN DIFFERENT BANK ACCOUNTS SUPPORTED BY COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS WHICH WERE CLAIMED TO BE FILED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. BRIEF RECONCILIATION IS ALSO FILED WHICH CLEARLY SUGGEST THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUFFICIENT WITHDRAWALS FROM DIFFERENT BANK ACCOUNTS WHICH WERE THE SOURCE OF MAKING DEPOSIT IN THE ACCOUNT IN QUESTION , HAVE NOT BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WHEN AIR INFORMATION WAS THERE THAT ASSESSEE MADE CASH DEPOS IT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, THEN ASSESSING OFFICER IS REQUIRE D TO LOOK INTO THE DETAILS OF ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS MAIN TAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED IN THE REPLY BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT TRANSACTIONS ARE REFLECTED I N THE SUMMARY OF CASH TRANSACTIONS WITH THE BANK WHICH HA VE BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. 6. IT WAS ALSO CLAIMED THAT ASSESSEE RECONCILED ALL THE FIGURES. THEREFORE, IF ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT S ATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE, HE SHOULD HAV E NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED R E- CONCILIATION STATEMENT. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DETA IL IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE DISPUTED THAT ASSESSEE FILED RECONCILIATION STATEME NT ALONGWITH ALL THE BANK ACCOUNTS IN ORDER TO EXPLAIN THAT SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS WITHDRAWA L FROM THE OTHER BANKS. SINCE NO SPECIFIC FINDINGS HAVE B EEN GIVEN ON THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND RE-CONCILIAT ION 5 STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE NOT BEEN DISCUSSED I N THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW MATTER REQUIRES RE- CONSIDERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FIL E OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH DIRECTION TO RE-DECIDE THE M ATTER IN ISSUE BY VERIFYING THE FACTS FROM THE RECONCILIATIO N STATEMENT AND ALL THE COPIES OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER S HALL GIVE REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FILE ONE MORE SET OF RECONCILIATION STATEMENT AND COPIES OF ALL THE B ANK ACCOUNTS BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS PERUSAL A ND DECISION IN THE MATTER. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (BHAVNE SH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 13 TH JANUARY,2017. POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH