Sri G Ravi Babu, Vijayawada V. The ITO, Ward-2(4), Vijayawada

ITA 526/VIZ/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 52625314 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 25-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 23-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Unexplained expenditure; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 133A; 148; 144

Judgement Text

ITA NO.526/VIZ/2010 G. RAVI BABU, VIJAYAWADA IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 526 /VIZAG/ 2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 G. RAVI BABU VIJAYAWADA VS. ITO WARD-2(4) VIJAYAWADA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.ABRPG 3937G ASSESSEE BY: SHRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY: SHRI R.K. SINGH, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 25.02.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.02.2014 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AGAINST ORDER DATED 20.07.2010 OF LD. CIT(A) VIJAYA WADA. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 10 GROUNDS CH ALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON VARIOUS ISSUES. HOWEVER, AT THE T IME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE US, THE LD. A.R. REFERRING TO GROUND NOS.3 & 8 SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HAVE BEEN PASSED WITHOUT AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPOR TUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL EN GAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRAVELS AND CONSTRUCTION. FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSM ENT YEAR, A RETURN WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 03.04.2006 DECLARING INCOM E OF RS.1,35,998/-. SINCE A SURVEY HAD BEEN CONDUCTED IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 133A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT ON 15.07.2004, RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS WERE INITIATED BY VIRTUE OF A NOTICE DATED 22.11.2006 ISSUED U/S 148 OF THE ACT. AS IT APPEARS FROM RECORD, IN COURSE OF RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING ON 16.10.2007, THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ADMITTED THAT HE HAS NOT MAINTAINED ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE RELEVANT P ERIOD. THE ASSESSING ITA NO.526/VIZ/2010 G. RAVI BABU, VIJAYAWADA 2 OFFICER WHEN ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH PARTICUL ARS OF SOURCES FOR THE AMOUNT CREDITED IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WITH TH E CORPORATION BANK, THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE FROM THE END OF THE ASSESSE E EITHER ON THE STIPULATED DATE OR ON THE SUBSEQUENT DATES. THEREF ORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE PROPOSING TO INVOKE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 144 OF THE ACT WHICH ALSO FAILED TO GET ANY RESPONSE FR OM THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, ON 28.12.2007, A LETTER SIGNED ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE BY HIS FATHER SHRI G. SATYANARAYANA WAS FILED, WHEREIN IT WAS CLAIMED THA T THE CREDIT ENTRIES APPEARING IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WERE OUT OF CASH AVAI LABLE IN THE EARLIER FINANCIAL YEAR. SINCE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO RESPO ND TO THE STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND OFFER SATISFACT ORY EXPLANATION, HE PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDGEMENT ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD BY DETERMININ G THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.10,87,070/- WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: I. CASH INTRODUCED IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. SWARNA CONSTRU CTIONS - RS.1,00,000/- II. UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF APARTMENT IN RENUKA ENCLAVE RS.1,09,000/- III. UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE INCURRED TOWARDS STAMP DUTY AND REGISTRATION CHARGES RS.73,650/- IV. UNEXPLAINED LIC PREMIUMS PAID RS.61,497/- V. UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN CHITS RS.6,06,925/- 4. AGAINST THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT ORDER THE ASSES SEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). AS NOTED BY THE CIT(A) I N HIS ORDER, INSPITE OF NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES BEING GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT HIS CASE FROM 10.07.2008 TO 16.07.2010, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR WHICH FORCED THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE APPEAL EX-PARTE ON THE BAS IS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE BEFORE HIM. THE CIT(A) ULTIMATELY CONFIR MED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BY HOLDING AS UNDER: THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DEALT WITH THE ISSUES IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN A DETAILED MANNER AND HAS GIVEN SOUND REAS ONS FOR BRINGING TO TAX THE ADDITIONAL INCOME. ON THE CONTRARY, EXCEPT FOR STATING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD SUFFICIENT CASH IN THE EARLIER YEAR TO EXPLAIN THE INVESTMENTS AND EXPENDITURE INCURRED DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD, NO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT HAS BEEN ADDUCED. THIS EXPLANATION WAS ALREADY OFFERED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND WAS REJECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT BROUGHT ON RE CORD ANY NEW EVIDENCE OR EXPLANATION IN THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. RELYING ON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE CASE OF ANIL GOEL VS. ITA NO.526/VIZ/2010 G. RAVI BABU, VIJAYAWADA 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (APPEALS-I) LUDHIANA 30 6 ITR 212 (2008), AS I DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PROPER EXPLANATION OF THE APPELLANT WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT NO INTERFERENCE IN THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER IS CALLED FOR. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERI ALS ON RECORD. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT WHILE COMPLETI NG THE BEST JUDGEMENT ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION S ON VARIOUS COUNT IN ABSENCE OF PROPER EXPLANATION BY THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) HAS ALSO DECIDED THE APPEAL EX-PARTE IN ABSENCE OF REPRESENTATION BY THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF PROVIDING SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES. FROM THE AFORESAI D FACT, IT IS VERY MUCH CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEES APPROACH IN THE TAX PROCEEDINGS IS NOT TOO SERIOUS. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. A.R . THAT IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN THE ASSESSEE WOULD PRODUCE NEC ESSARY MATERIAL AND EVIDENCE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WE ARE INCLI NED TO GRANT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEFORE T HE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. WE THEREFORE, WITHOUT GOIN G INTO THE MERITS OF THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO HIM FOR MAKING AN ASSESSMENT DE-NOVO AFTER AFFORDING REASON ABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, WE MAKE IT C LEAR THAT IF THERE IS STILL NON-COOPERATION FROM THE END OF THE ASSESSEE OR HE FAILS TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM, THEN IT WILL BE OPEN FOR THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT BY CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. SINCE WE HAVE REMITTED THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WE HAVE NOT EXPRESSED ANY OPINION WITH REG ARD TO THE MERITS OF THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED T O BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH FEB14 SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATED 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2014 ITA NO.526/VIZ/2010 G. RAVI BABU, VIJAYAWADA 4 COPY TO 1 G. RAVI BABU, D.NO.26-22-24, SUNDARAMMA STREET, G ANDHI NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA 2 ITO WARD-2(4), VIJAYAWADA 3 THE CIT, VIJAYAWADA 4 THE CIT(A), VIJAYAWADA 5 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER (B. VENU GOPAL) SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM