Mr. A.K.Amarnath, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 587/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 58721714 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 21-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND
• Section: 68; 6

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S M C BENCH, CHENNAI ... , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.587/MDS/2012 ' #$' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHRI A.K. AMARNATH, PROP OF: M/S SUMMI SAREE MANDIR, 114/78, N.S.C. BOSE ROAD, CHENNAI - 600 001. PAN : ACDPA 5810 H V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-IX, CHENNAI - 600 034. (&'/ APPELLANT) (()&'/ RESPONDENT) &' * + / APPELLANT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE ()&' * + / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.V. SREEKANTH, JCIT , # * -. / DATE OF HEARING : 21.08.2015 /0$ * -. / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.09.2015 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)IX, CHENNAI , DATED 23.01.2012 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2 I.T.A. NO.587/MDS/12 2. SHRI D. ANAND, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT A SUM OF ` 7 LAKHS WAS DEPOSITED IN KARUR VYSYA BANK IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE SMT. A.A. ANURADHA. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEES WIFE ADMITTED THA T SHE DOES NOT OWN ANY MOVABLE OR IMMOVABLE PROPERTY AND ALSO ADMI TTED THAT SHE DOES NOT HAVE ANY ACCUMULATED CASH FROM HER PAST SA VINGS. SINCE THE ASSESSEES WIFE HAS NO SOURCE OF INCOME, THE AS SESSING OFFICER PRESUMED THAT THE ASSESSEES MONEY WAS USED FOR MAK ING DEPOSIT IN THE ASSESSEES WIFE ACCOUNT. ACCORDING TO THE L D. COUNSEL, IF AT ALL ANY ADDITION HAS TO BE MADE, IT HAS TO BE MADE ONLY IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. REFERRING TO SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'), THE LD.COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT SECTION 68 OF THE ACT VERY CLEARLY SAYS THAT WHEN ANY SUM IS FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE, FOR ANY PREVIOU S YEAR, AND THE ASSESSEE OFFERS NO EXPLANATION, THEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE MONEY BELONGS TO ASSESSEE, THEN HE MAY BRING THE SUM FOR TAXATION. IN THIS CASE, THE MONEY WAS FOUN D CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE AND NOT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. C OUNSEL, THERE CANNOT BE ANY ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE. 3 I.T.A. NO.587/MDS/12 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI A.V. SREEKANTH, THE LD. DE PARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE WAS CREDITED WITH A SUM OF ` 7 LAKHS FROM 02.01.2008 TO 17.03.2008. THE MONEY WAS, IN FACT, DEPOSITED BY C ASH BY REFERRING THE PAN OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER EXA MINED THE ASSESSEES WIFE SMT. A.A. ANURADHA AND SHE EXPLAINE D THAT SHE WAS ONLY A HOUSEWIFE AND SHE HAS NO SOURCE OF INCOM E. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., FOR DEPOSITING THE MONEY, THE ASSE SSEES PAN WAS USED, THEREFORE, IT IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE FOR MAKING THIS DEPOSIT. THE LD. D.R. FURTHER SUBMITTE D THAT THE ASSESSEES WIFE HAS STATED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFF ICER THAT SHE HAS NO ACCUMULATED CASH FROM HER PAST SAVINGS. THE REFORE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITHE R SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. I HAVE ALS O CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT, WH ICH READS AS UNDER:- WHERE ANY SUM IS FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF AN ASSESSEE MAINTAINED FOR ANY PREVIOUS YEAR, AND THE ASSESSEE OFFERS NO EXPLANATION ABOUT THE NATURE AND SOURCE THEREOF OR THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY HIM IS NOT, IN 4 I.T.A. NO.587/MDS/12 THE OPINION OF THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, SATISFACTORY, THE SUM SO CREDITED MAY BE CHARGED TO INCOME-TAX AS THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE OF THAT PREVIOUS YEAR. A BARE READING OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT CLEARLY SAY S THAT WHERE ANY SUM IS FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF AN ASSESSEE, IF IT IS NOT EXPLAINED TO THE SATISFACTORY OF THE ASSESSING OFFI CER, THEN THE SUM MAY BE CHARGED TO INCOME-TAX AS INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE OF THAT PREVIOUS YEAR. IN THIS CASE, THE CREDIT WAS FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE SMT. A.A. ANURADHA A ND NOT IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ONLY CONTENTION OF TH E REVENUE IS THAT FOR MAKING THE DEPOSIT, THE ASSESSEES PAN WAS USED. SECTION 68 OF THE ACT DOES NOT SAY THAT THE ADDITION SHOULD BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE WHOSE PAN WAS REFERRED WHILE MAKING THE DEPOSIT. SECTION 68 OF THE ACT CLEARLY SAYS THAT I T SHOULD BE CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN WHOSE BOOKS THE SUM WAS FOUND CREDITED. IN THIS CASE, THE SUM OF ` 7 LAKHS WAS FOUND CREDITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE SMT. A.A. ANURADHA. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE OF SECTION 6 8 OF THE ACT, THE ADDITION, IF ANY, CAN BE MADE ONLY IN THE HANDS OF SMT. A.A. ANURADHA, ASSESSEES WIFE AND NOT IN THE HANDS OF T HE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS UNABLE TO UPHOLD THE FI NDING OF THE LOWER 5 I.T.A. NO.587/MDS/12 AUTHORITY. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEA LS) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ADDITION OF ` 7 LAKHS IS DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( ... ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED, THE 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2015. KRI. * (-34 54$- /COPY TO: 1. &' /APPELLANT 2. ()&' /RESPONDENT 3. , 6- () /CIT(A)-IX, CHENNAI-34 4. , 6- /CIT-VIII, CHENNAI-34 5. 4#7 (- /DR 6. 8' 9 /GF.