Attar Singh Lohia, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 5153/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 74252 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-09-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y KAKKAR
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ITA NO. 5153/DEL/2013 ASSTT. YR: 2008-09 ATTAR SINGH LOHIA VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 256, VILLAGE GHITORNI, NEW DELHI. WARD 24(4), NEW DELHI. PAN: ACHPL 1487 D ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TARSEM LAL CA RESPONDENT BY : MS. Y. KAKKAR SR. DR O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, J.M: : THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CI T(A)-XVII, NEW DELHI DATED 10-07-2013 RELATING TO A.Y. 2008-09. FO LLOWING GROUND IS RAISED: FOR THAT THE CIT(APPEALS)-XVII NEW DELHI ERRED IN UPHOLDING ADDITION FOR RS. 2640149/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOS IT INTO BANK WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD AND/ OR GENUINE BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS. 2. FACTS, IN BRIEF ARE: FOR A.Y. 2008-09 THE A.O. C OMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) AT AN INCOME OF RS. 35,01,990 /- AS AGAINST INCOME OF RS. 2,49,067/- RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE, BY MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS, INCLUDING ADDITION OF RS. 26,40,149/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT IN BANKS. 2.1. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE TH E CIT(A) WHO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF A.O. BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 2 GROUND NO. 4 IS IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS. 26,4 0,149/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK. THE A.O. STATED TH AT THE APPELLANT FAILED TO GIVE EVIDENCE OR SOURCE OF SEVE RAL DEPOSITS IN ITS BANK ACCOUNTS. THE A.O. HAS TAKEN THE AMOUNT OF RS. 28,39,149/- BUT HAS ULTIMATELY MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 26,40,149/- ONLY. IN VARIOUS SUBMISSION FILED BEFOR E ME THE APPELLANT HAS NOT GIVEN ANY EVIDENCE TO EXPLAIN THE VARIOUS CASH DEPOSITS IN ITS ACCOUNT. IN VIEW THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS. 26,40,149/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT IS CONF IRMED. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT ASSE SSING OFFICER MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WITHOUT VERIFYING THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE SI MPLY CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE A.O. LD. COUNSEL PLEADED THAT IN VIEW OF THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE ISSUE MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSES SING OFFICER FOR DECISION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER HEARING THE ASS ESSEE AND PROPERLY VERIFYING THE EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORTITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OF FICER WHILE MAKING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER: THE ASSESSEE WAS CONFRONTED VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY 07-12- 2010 TO GIVE EXPLANATION AND EVIDENCES REGARD THE C ASH DEPOSITED IN ALL THE ABOVE THREE BANK ACCOUNTS MAIN TAIN BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE THE ASSESSEE SUBMIT A SELF MAD E STATEMENT SHOWING SOME ENTRIES OF CASH DEPOSITED BUT NO CLARI FICATION REGARDING THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT OF CASH WAS GIVEN A ND ALSO SUBMITTED VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 13-12-2010 IN PARA 6 OF HIS LETTER STATED THAT BEING OLD AGE, THE FURNISHING OF INFOR MATION IS IN BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. FROM THE ABOVE I T IS CLEARLY 3 EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO GIVE ANY EV IDENCE OR SOURCE FOR DEPOSITING THIS CASH AMOUNT TO THE EXTEN T OF RS. 28,39,149/-. AS SUCH THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 28,38,149/- IS ADDED BACK TO THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 68 O F IT ACT 1961, AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 5.1. A PERUSAL OF ABOVE REVEALS THAT IT IS NOT A CA SE WHERE NO EXPLANATION OR EVIDENCE WAS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM. THE ASSESSEE HAD DULY FURNISHED EXPLANATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT MAKING VERIFICATION OR PUTTING SPEC IFIC QUERY MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD BE MET IF THE MATTER IN QUESTION IS RESTORED BACK TO THE F ILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECISION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORD ING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND DUE VERIFICATION OF THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACC ORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 04-03-2014. SD/- SD/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA) ( R.P. TOLANI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 04-03-2014. MP COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 4