Smt.Ashwini Jadeppa Gadwal , Raichur V. The income Tax Officer Ward-2, Raichur

ITA 482/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4744 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PADMA MEENAKSHI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Gift; Maximum Marginal Rate; Source of fund
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC-C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 482 / BANG/201 8 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 4 - 1 5 SMT. ASHWINI JADEPPA GADWAL, #5-6-50, NETAJI ROAD, NETAJI NAGAR, RAICHUR. PAN: BLVPG0139F VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, RAICHUR. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SURESH MUTHUKRISHNAN, CA RESPONDENT BY : SMT. PADMA MEENAKSHI, JCIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 09 . 0 5 .2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01 . 06 .201 8 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THEASSESSEE WHICH IS DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), GULBARGA DATED18.12.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YE AR 2014-15. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER. 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED A O IN SO FAR AS IT IS AGAINST THE APPELLANT IS OPPOSED TO LAW, EQUITY, WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE, PROB ABILITIES, FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE APPELLANT DENIES HERSELF LIABLE TO BE ASSESS ED ON A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.7,03,300/- DETERMINED BY THE LEARNED A.O. AS AGAINST THE REPORTED TOTAL TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.2,03,300/- BY T HE APPELLANT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED A.O. IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF A SUM OF RS.5,00,000/- BEING THE ALLEGED CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT UNDER THE FAC TS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE 4. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED A.O. IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE ENTIRE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOU NT AS THE ITA NO. 482/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 4 UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS U/S.69 OF THE ACT., UNDER T HE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE. 5. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED A.O HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE GIFTS WERE RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT ON THE OCCASION OF HER MARRIAGE FROM HER PARENTS WHO A RE AGRICULTURISTS AND THEIR IDENTITY IS NOT IN DOUBT. 6. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT[ A] HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE EVIDENCE FILED IN SUPPORT OF THE A GRICULTURAL INCOME OF THE DONORS AND HAS MADE THE ADDITION ON A SUSPIC ION OF THE SOURCE OF SOURCE, WHICH IS CONTRARY TO LAW. 7. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED A.O HAS ERRED IN NOT GIVING CREDIT TO THE INCOME EARNED BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR, WHICH SUM HAS BEEN OFFERED TO TAX. 8. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED A.O. GROSSLY ERRED IN APPLYING THE TAX RATE AT 30% MMR U/S.115B ON THE EN TIRE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AS THE UNEXPLAINED INVESTM ENTS U/S.69 OF THE ACT., UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPE LLANT'S CASE. 9. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE RIGHT TO SEEK WAIVER WI TH THE HON'BLE CCIT/DG, THE APPELLANT DENIES HERSELF LIABLE TO BE CHARGED TO INTEREST U/S 234A AND 234B OF THE ACT, WHICH UNDER THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE DESERVES TO B E CANCELLED. 10. WHEREFORE THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER S PASSED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE AGAINST TH E APPELLANT AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER AS THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL DEEM FIT AND PROPER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR OF ASSESSEE THAT WRIT TEN SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE BEFORE CIT(A) WHICH ARE AVAILABLE ON PAGES 6 AND 7 OF PAPER BOOK IN WHICH IT WAS SUBMITTED BY ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DIS CLOSED INCOME FOR THE PRESENT YEAR OF RS. 2,03,300/- AS PER THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THIS SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AS PART EXPLANATION OF THE CASH OF RS. 5 LAKHS WHICH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK. IT WAS ALSO SUBMI TTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED RS. 3 LAKHS AS GIFT FROM HER PARENTS AND S IMILAR GIFT WAS GIVEN BY THE PARENT OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESS EE ALSO AND REGARDING THE SOURCES OF FUNDS IN THE HANDS OF THE DONORS I.E. PA RENTS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME IS OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTURE PRODUCE OF ITA NO. 482/BANG/2018 PAGE 3 OF 4 PARENTS OF THE ASSESSEE. REGARDING GIFT FROM THE P ARENTS, IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ON PAGE 15 OF PAPER BOOK IS THE AFFIDAVIT OF T HE PARENTS OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER WHICH THEY HAVE GIVEN GIFT OF RS. 3 LAKHS TO EA CH OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE AND HER HUSBAND. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT UNDER THES E FACTS, ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED. THE LD. DR OF REVENUE SUP PORTED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT NO DETAI L WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO. IN THE REJOINDER, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR OF ASSESSEE THAT IN PARA 4.3.1 OF ITS ORDER, IT IS NOTED BY CIT(A) THAT THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE CIT(A) IN APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ARE ONE AND SAME WH ICH WERE ALREADY FILED BEFORE THE AO IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. I FIND THAT IN PARA 4.4 OF ITS ORDER, THE DECISION OF CIT(A) IS ON THIS BASIS THAT IT WAS THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM THAT THE DEPOSIT OF RS. 5 LAKHS IN BANK ACCOUNT IN CASH IS OUT OF PROFESSIONAL INCOME, STREEDHAN AND GIFTS. IN SPITE OF NOTING THIS ARGUMENT OF ASSESSEE, NO FINDING IS GIVEN BY CIT(A) AS TO HOW T HIS CLAIM IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING A TAXABLE INCOME OF RS. 2,03,300/-. REGA RDING THE SOURCES OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, THE AO HAS NOTED IN PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INDIVIDUAL DERIVING INCOME FROM OTHER S OURCES. THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING INCOME OF RS. 2 LAKHS PLUS IN THE PRESENT YE AR AND HENCE, IT CANNOT BE RULED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO HAVING SOME INC OME IN EARLIER YEARS ALSO AND THEREFORE, HAVING CASH OF RS. 2 LAKHS IN CASH F OR DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEES OUT OF OWN FUNDS BEING OUT OF SAVINGS OF INCOME CANNOT BE RULED OUT UNLESS IT IS SHOWN BY AO THAT SUCH INC OME IS USED FOR SOME OTHER PURPOSES. THERE IS NO SUCH FINDING OF AO THAT INCO ME OF ASSESSEE FOR PRESENT YEAR OR OF EARLIER YEAR HAS BEEN USED FOR SOME OTHE R PURPOSES. HENCE, I HOLD THAT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK TO THE EX TENT OF RS. 2 LACS IS EXPLAINED OUT OF ASSESSEES SAVINGS. REGARDING THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF HAVING GIFT OF RS. 3 LAKHS FROM HER PARENTS, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE CERTIFICATE WHICH IS AVAILABLE ON PAGE NO. 18 OF PAPER BOOK AS PER WHICH THE MARRIAGE WAS SOLEMNIZED ON 29.05.2013 I.E. DURING THE PRESENT YE AR. IN THE YEAR OF MARRIAGE OF THE ASSESSEE, RECEIPT OF GIFT BY HER AND HER HUS BAND FROM PARENTS OF RS. 3 ITA NO. 482/BANG/2018 PAGE 4 OF 4 LAKHS EACH OF THEM IS NOT UNREASONABLE. CONSIDERIN G THESE FACTS, I HOLD THAT IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THE BALANCE CASH DEP OSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT OF RS. 3 LACS ALSO STANDS EXPLAINED. HENCE, THE ENTIRE ADDIT ION OF RS. 5 LACS MADE BY THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND THE SAME IS DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 01 ST JUNE, 2018. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.