Shri Santaram Borse, Indore V. The ITO 5(2), Indore

ITA 555/IND/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7880 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 22-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S S DESHPANDE
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PAN NO. : ACDPB74511C I.T.A.NO. 555 /IND/201 2 . A.Y. : 2008 - 09 SHRI SHANTARAM BORSE, ITO, INDORE. VS 5(2), INDORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R. A. VERMA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 24 . 1 2 .2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.12 .201 2 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 16.07.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED FOR ADDITION OF RS. 1,79,480/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. -: 2: - 2 3. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORDS PERUSED. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT DURING THE YEAR, T HE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED LAND FOR CONSIDERATION OF RS. 2,31,80 0/-. A SUM OF RS. 52,000/- WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH DE MAND DRAFT AND THE BALANCE PAYMENT OF RS. 1,79,800/- WAS MADE BY HIS SON IN LAW, SHRI RAVINDRA PATIL. THE ASSESSEE H AS FILED AFFIDAVIT OF SON IN LAW DULY SWORN IN BEFORE NOTARY PUBLIC, WHEREIN SON IN LAW HAS AFFIRMED THAT HE HAS MADE AD JUSTMENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE DETAILS OF HIS LAND HOLDINGS AND SOURCE OF INCOME WERE ALSO FILED. THUS, COMPLETE DE TAILS OF TRANSACTION WERE FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER , BUT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT TAKE COGNIZANCE OF VARIOU S DOCUMENTS FILED BEFORE HIM NOR THE AFFIDAVIT OF SHR I RAVINDRA PATIL, SON IN LAW OF THE ASSESSEE, FILED IN CONFIRM ATION OF BALANCE ADJUSTMENT OF RS. 1,79,800/-. HAD THE ASSES SING OFFICER ANY DOUBT REGARDING THE PAYMENT HAVING BEEN MADE BY THE SON IN LAW, HE WAS HAVING FULL POWER TO CALL HI M U/S 131. NEITHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER EXAMINED NOR THE CIT( A) HAS GIVEN ANY FINDING WITH REGARD TO THE THINGS WHICH T HE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FAILED TO DO. THE POWERS OF C IT(A) ARE -: 3: - 3 COTERMINOUS TO THAT OF ASSESSING OFFICER, WHAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FAILED TO DO, THE CIT(A) IS EQUALLY COM PETENT TO DO THE SAME. FOR THE THINGS WHICH ARE NOT DONE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOR BY THE LD.CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE CANNOT B E PENALIZED. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, I DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT FOR THE ADDITI ON OF RS. 1,79,480/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. BY SETTIN G ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, I DIRECT THE ASSESS ING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION SO MADE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH DECEMBER, 2012. (R. C. SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED :24 TH DECEMBER, 2012. CPU* 26