ACIT, Kota V. SHRI KULDEEP SINGH SHAKTAWAT, BUNDI

ITA 541/JPR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5011 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA CIT DHK

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 631/JP/2012 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05. SHRI KULDEEP SINGH SHAKTAWAT C/O RAJ KUMAR JAIN, ADVOCATE, 217, 1 ST FLOOR, GOPAL SINGH PLAZA, BUNDI. CUKE VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUNDI. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AWZPS 1416 R VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 541/JP/2012 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA. CUKE VS. SHRI KULDEEP SINGH SHAKTAWAT C/O RAJ KUMAR JAIN, ADVOCATE, 217, 1 ST FLOOR, GOPAL SINGH PLAZA, BUNDI. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AWZPS 1416 R VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 29.09.2016. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14/10/2016. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM. THESE TWO APPEALS ONE BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 AND ANOTHER BY THE REVENUE PERTAINING TO A. Y. 2005-06 ARE DIRECTED AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), KOTA DATED 30.03 .2012 AND 23.03.2012. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN BOTH THESE APPEALS, T HEY ARE BEING DECIDED BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2 ITA NO. 631 & 541/JP/2012 SHRI KULDEEP SINGH SHAKTAWAT. 2. WE FIRST TAKE UP ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 63 1/JP/2012. THE APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 7 DAYS. 3. NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR AN Y APPLICATION IS RECEIVED ON THE DATE OF HEARING THOUGH THE NOTICE UNDER REGISTE RED POST WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE ASSESSEES ADDRESS. THEREFORE, IT A PPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED TO PURSUE HIS CASE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANC ES, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF DELHI BENCH OF ITAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDI A (P) LTD., (1991) 38 ITD 320 AND ALSO ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ESTATE OF LATE TUKHOJI RAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480 (MP), THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ADMITTED AND IS HEREBY DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 4. NOW WE TAKE UP REVENUES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 541/J P/2012. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN :- (I) DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 34,73,644/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED UNSECURED LOANS, WHEN THE ASSESSEE FAIL ED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS, CREDITWORTHINESS AND IDENTITY OF T HE CREDITORS AND RELYING UPON HIS OWN ORDER IN THE ASSESSEES CA SE IN A.Y. 2004-05 EVEN THOUGH THE REFERRED TO ORDER HAS NOT A TTAINED ANY FINALITY. (II) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LIBERTY TO RAISE ADDITIONAL GR OUND AND TO MODIFY/AMEND THE GROUND OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HE ARING. 5. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT TH E CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPENED FOR ASSESSMENT AND THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SE CTION 147/143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS TH E ACT) WAS FRAMED VIDE ORDER DATED 27.12.2010. WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT, TH E AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE REPAYMENT OF LOAN TO M/S. JALKANT A MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. 3 ITA NO. 631 & 541/JP/2012 SHRI KULDEEP SINGH SHAKTAWAT. LTD. OF RS. 85 LACS, THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN UNSECUR ED LOAN OF RS. 20,39,443/- AND RS. 14,34,201/- DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION FROM M/S. VIJENDRA SINGH HADA & PARTY AND M/S. BHIMSEN HADA & PARTY RESPECTIVELY, THE ASSESSEE MADE INVESTMENT OF RS. 18.00 LACS IN M/S. AOP, BARAN AND RS. 15.00 LACS IN M/S. JALKANTA DIRECTOR, THE ASSESSEE ALSO MADE AN INVESTMENT OF RS. 2.50 LACS I N A SHOP. THUS, THE AO MADE THE ASSESSMENT BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 34,73,6 44/- AS UNEXPLAINED UNSECURED LOANS. AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER, THE ASSESSEE PREFE RRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT (A), WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESS EE PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL. WHILE PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL, THE LD. CIT (A) D ELETED THE ADDITION. 6. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. THE LD. D/R VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE LD. CIT ( A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION. HE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF A O. 8. WE HAVE HEARD LD. D/R. NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND G ONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HA S GIVEN A FINDING OF FACT IN PARA 4.12 OF HIS ORDER AS UNDER :- GROUND NO. 1, 4 & 5 THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS. 34,73,64 4/- ON THE GROUND THAT CREDITS OF RS. 20,39,443/- RECEIVED FROM VIJEN DER SINGH DADA & PARTY AND RS. 14,34,201/- RECEIVED FROM M/S. BHIM S INGH CHUNDAWAT & PARTY WERE NOT EXPLAINED. IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 I HAVE CONFIRMED ADDITIO N OF RS. 85 LAKHS ON PROTECTIVE BASIS & RS. 65.00 LAKHS ON SUBSTANTIV E BASIS. THE CASH CREDITS IN CURRENT YEAR FLOWED FROM THE ABOVE AMOUN TS ADDED IN A.Y. 2004-05, AS UNDER :- 1. THE ASSESSEE INVESTED RS. 85 LAKHS IN AOP M/S. VIJE NDRA SINGH & PARTY. 4 ITA NO. 631 & 541/JP/2012 SHRI KULDEEP SINGH SHAKTAWAT. 2. M/S. VIJENDRA SINGH & PARTY REFUNDED RS. 85 LAKHS + RS. 20,39,443/- TO ASSESSEE DURING F.Y. 2004-05, OUT OF THIS ASSESSEE DEPOSITED RS. 85,00,000/- WITH AOP, BHIM SINGH CHUN DAWAT & COMPANY. 3. M/S. BHIM SINGH CHUNDAWAT & COMPANY PAID RS. 1,00,0 0,000/- TO SH. GAJENDRA PORWAL (A/C JALKANTA MANAGEMENT SERVIC ES PVT. LTD.) THUS THE MONEY REPRESENT NOTHING BUT RS. 1,50,00,00 0/- LAKHS ADDED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE IN A.Y. 2004-05 AND REPRES ENTS ITS SUBSEQUENT FLOW. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THEREFORE DIRECTED TO DELE TE ADDITION OF RS. 34,73,644/-. THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. THE ABOVE FINDING OF FACTS ARE NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE REVENUE BY PLACING ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL ON RECORD. THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE FINDING OF FACT AS REPORTED BY THE LD. CIT (A). HENCE WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), THE SAME IS HEREBY UPHELD. THEREFORE, THE APP EAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14/10/2 016. SD/- SD/- ( HKKXPUN ( DQY HKKJR ) ( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 14/10/2016. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- SHRI KULDEEP SINGH SHAKTAWAT, BU NDI. 2. THE RESPONDENT THE ITO, BUNDI/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KOTA. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 631 & 541/JP/2012) LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 5 ITA NO. 631 & 541/JP/2012 SHRI KULDEEP SINGH SHAKTAWAT.