The ITO, 4(3), Indore V. Smt. Meena Jain, Indore

ITA 479/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 47886 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 14-07-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN DEWAN
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWIN SETHI
• Keywords: Salary income

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.479/IND/2010 AY : 2007-08 ITO-4(3), INDORE APPELLANT VS SMT. MEENA JAIN, INDORE PAN AHAPJ 0282 A RESPONDENT AND, CROSS-OBJECTION NO.23/IND/2010 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.479/IND/2010 AY : 2007-08 SMT. MEENA JAIN, INDORE PAN AHAPJ 0282 A OBJECTOR VS. ITO-4(3), INDORE RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI ARUN DEWAN, SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHWIN SETHI, CA O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER 2 THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS-OBJECTION BY TH E ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-II , INDORE, DATED 30.3.2010. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWI NG GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AND LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN GIVING RELIEF OF RS.30,40,000/- RELATED TO AIR INFORMATION ON CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT OF STATE BANK OF INDORE, PHADNIS COLONY BRANCH, INDORE WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS GAVE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND SHE COULD NOT PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN GIVING RELIEF OF RS.4,24,000/- RELATED TO CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE WITH STATE BANK OF INDORE, GUMASTA NAGAR BRANCH, INDORE WHEN ASSESSING OFFICER IN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS GAVE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSEE AND SHE COULD NOT PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION AMOUNTING TO RS.7,39,000/- IN HER BANK ACCOUNT. 2. DURING HEARING, THE LD.SR.DR DEFENDED TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER BY CONTENDING THAT THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN GIV ING RELIEF 3 RELATED TO AIR INFORMATION ON CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT SPECIALLY WHEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION S AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BRIEF FACTS ARE T HAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS.30,40,000/- O N ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT IN A SAVING BANK ACCOUNT, STATE BAN K OF INDORE. THE ASSESSEE FILED A CERTIFICATE FROM THE BANK, CER TIFYING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT HAVING ANY BANK ACCOUNT AS HAS BEEN ALLEGED RATHER THERE WAS A ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF H USBAND OF THE ASSESSEE WHO IS ALSO A REGULAR ASSESSEE HAVING SEPARATE PAN NO. AND WAS FILING RETURN WITH THE DEPARTMENT. ALL THESE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WERE FILED BEFORE THE LD.CIT( A) WHO EXAMINED THE SAME AND FOUND THE CLAIM OF THE ASSES SEE TO BE CORRECT AND DELETED THE ADDITION. IN VIEW OF THESE UNCONTROVERTED FACTS WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ST AND OF THE LD.CIT(A), THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THIS GRO UND OF THE REVENUE. 4 4. THE NEXT GROUND PERTAINS TO DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,24,000/-. IDENTICALLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER MA DE ADDITION OF RS.7,39,000/- WHICH WAS FOUND DEPOSITED IN THE B ANK.THE NECESSARY EVIDENCES WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFO RE THE LD.CIT(A) AND THE SAME WERE SENT TO THE ASSESSING O FFICER FOR HIS REPORT. THE LD.AO SENT HIS REMAND REPORT AND IT WAS FOUND THAT THE ACCOUNT WAS IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE AND AM OUNT OF RS.3,50,000/- WAS THROUGH CHEQUES DT.17.06.2006 AND 7.03.2007, WHICH WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HER HUSBAND SHRI DINESH JAIN. THE COPY OF THE CONFIRMAT ION OF ACCOUNT WAS ALSO FILED, CONSEQUENTLY THE AMOUNT OF RS. 3,50,000/- WAS TREATED AS EXPLAINED. THE AMOUNT OF RS. 74,000/- WAS FOUND TO BE FROM SALARY INCOME AGGREGA TING RS. 1,34,400/- BESIDES TUTION INCOME OF RS.28,000/-.THE RFORE THE AMOUNT OF RS.74,000/- WAS FOUND TO BE EXPLAINED. TH E REMAINING AMOUNT WAS FOUND TO BE UNEXPLAINED. THE R EMAINING AMOUNT WHICH COULD NOT BE EXPLAINED WAS SUSTAINED. IN VIEW OF THIS UNCONTROVERTED FINDING, THE STAND OF LD. CIT(A ) IS AFFIRMED, THEREFORE, THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS ALSO DISMI SSED. 5 5. SO FAR AS THE CROSS OBJECTIONS, RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, ARE CONCERNED THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE REMAI NING AMOUNT WHICH WAS SUSTAINED BY THE LD.CIT(A). SINCE WE HAVE AFFIRMED THE STAND OF THE LD.CIT(A) WHILE DEALING W ITH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE (SUPRA) WHEREIN THE REMAINING AMOUNT WAS FOUND TO BE UNEXPLAINED, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MER IT IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, CONSEQUENTLY, DIS MISSED. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THE CO OF T HE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES AT THE CO NCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 30 TH JUNE, 2011. (R.C.SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 30.6.2011 COPY TO: APPELLANT, RESPONDENT, CIT, CIT(A), DR, GU ARD FILE