ITO, UDAIPUR V. Shri Rattan S. Tak, UDAIPUR

ITA 600/JODH/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5287 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L MOURYA
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources
• Section: 131

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 600 / JODH /201 4 (ASST. YEAR : 20 11 - 12 ) ITO, WARD - 2 (1), UDAIPUR . VS. SHRI RATTAN S. TAK, A - 1, GURU KRIPA BHAWAN, SHIV NAGAR, NEAR SOPHIA SCHOOL, DAROLI HOUSE, SOUTH SUNDERWAS, UDAIPUR (RAJ.) . PAN NO. ACQPT 3388 L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE . DEPARTMENT BY : S HRI S.L. MOURYA - DR DATE OF HEARING : 1 1 / 0 3 /201 6 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 1 / 03 /201 6 . O R D E R PER N.S. SAINI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , UDAIPUR , DATED 21 / 1 0/201 4 . 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - ON THE FACTS AND IN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN : ON THE FACTS AND IN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF R S.37 , 14 , 122/ - ON ACCOUNT O F UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN SB ACCOUNT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT DESPITE OF PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPP ORTUNITIES OF BEING HEARD THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND EVIDENCE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF SAID CASH DEPOSITS IN HIS SAVING BANK ACCOUNT. 2 ITA NO. 600 / JODH /201 4 THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER, DELETE OR MODIFY ANY OR ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 3 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS. 37,14,722/ - ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS OUT OF THE CASH DEPOSIT S OF RS. 63,82,611/ - MADE DURING THE PERIOD 22/02/2011 TO 01/03/2011 IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT NO. 0501040003159213 WITH IDBI BANK FOR PURCHASE OF DEMAND DRAFT TO BE ENCLOSED WITH THE APPLICATION FOR LIQUOR LICENSE AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE CLAIM ED DEPOSITORS REGARDING THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE MADE BY OTHER PERSONS , WHO LATER ON PURCHASED DEMAND DRAFT FROM THE SAME ACCOUNT FOR APPLYING LICENSE OF LIQUOR BUSINESS . ACCORD I NG TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR THE REASON THAT IT IS UNBELIEVABLE THAT SUCH HUGE AMOUNT WILL BE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK AMOUNT BY OTHER PERSONS FOR PURCHASE OF DEMAND DRAFT, BUT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON VERIFICATION OF THE CONFIRMATIONS FILED BEFORE THE HIM , HE ACCEPTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HIS BANK ACCOUNT WAS USED BY OTHER PERSONS FOR DEPOSITING CASH AND THEREAFTER SUCH PERSONS PURCHASED DEMAND DRAFT FOR APPLYING LICENSE OF LIQUOR BUSINESS. SINCE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CLAIMED DEPOSITS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE DEPOSITS OF RS.37,14,722/ - RECEIVED FROM THE FOLLOWING PE R SONS AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES OF THE ASSESSEE. 1 NAHAR SINGH 350000 2 ROOP SINGH 550000 3 JAGDISH TAK 350000 4 LAXMI LAL PRAJAPAT 350000 5 GHOUTHMALTAK 350000 6 RAJENDRA KUMAR TAK 250000 3 ITA NO. 600 / JODH /201 4 7 GAGAN SHARMA 250000 8 BHUPAL SINGH 250000 9 GOPAL SINGH 250000 10 KIRANTAK 219322 11 MANGILAL ODE 502050 12 MANOHARBAITAK 43350 TOTAL 3714722 4 . BEFORE T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ASSESSEE FILED CONFIRMATIONS FROM ALL THE DEPOSITORS, COPY OF THE INCOME TAX RETURNS FILED IN THE CASE OF FIVE DEPOSITORS ETC. THESE WERE SENT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINING THE SAME ABOUT GENUINENESS, CREDITWORTHINESS ETC. O UT OF THE 12 CL A IMED DEPOSITORS , T HE ASSESSING OFFICER EXAMINED THE FOLLOWING DEPOSITORS UNDER SEC. 131 OF THE ACT AND THEIR STATEMENTS WERE RECORDE D AND COPY OF THE STATEMENTS SO RECORDED, HAVE BEEN SENT ALONG WITH THE REPORT SUBMITTED UNDER SEC. 46A OF THE ACT. S.NO. PARTICULARS PAN SOURCE OF INCOME 1 JAGDISHTAK AGKPT4241L ITR FOR AY 2010 - 11 TO AY 2011 - 12 ENCLOSED (ANNEXURE) 2. GAGAN SHARMA AMLPS6819A ITR FOR AY 2009 - 10 TO AY 2011 - 12 ENCLOSED (ANNEXURE) 3. KIRANTAK AEIPT2426B ITR FOR AY 2009 - 10 TO AY 2011 - 12 ENCLOSED (ANNEXURE) 4. MANGILAL ODE CONFIRMATION SUBMITTED 5. ON GOING THROUGH THE REPORT , THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OBSERVED TH A T SINCE ALL THE ABOVE PERSONS HAVE CATEGORICALLY CONFIRMED THE DEPOS I TS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE , IT WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE OTHER DEPOSITS AS THE NATURE OF THE DEPOSITS MADE BY OTHER DEPOSITORS WERE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND THEY HA V E CONFIRMED THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND SUBSEQUENT PURCHASE OF DEMAND DRAFT FOR DEPOSITING THE SAME WITH THE E XCISE D EPARTMENT FOR GETTING LIQUOR 4 ITA NO. 600 / JODH /201 4 BUSINESS LICENSE. THIS INDICAT ES TH A T THE ASSESSING OFFICER FULLY SATISFIED WITH THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS HE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY ADVERSE INFERENCE TO TREAT THE DEPOSITS AS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AS WELL AS THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE REMAND REPORT, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HELD TH A T THERE WAS NO CASE FOR TREATING THE DEPOSITS OF RS. 37,14,722/ - AS UNDI SCLOSED DEPOSITS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE MADE FROM HIS UNDISCLOSED SOURCE OF INCOME. HE, THEREFORE, D E LETED THE ADDITION. 6 . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF NOTICE OF HEARING SENT TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE , IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION AFTER CALLING FOR REMAND REPORT ON THE CONFIRMATIONS OF THE DEPOSIT OR S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS EXAMINED FROM OUT OF 12 DEPOSITS, 03 DEPOSITS WHO FILED BEFORE HIM THEIR INCOME TAX RETURNS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2009 - 10 TO 2011 - 12 AND ALSO CONFIRMATIONS OF T HE DEPOSIT ORS . THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS SATISFIED WITH THE SAME AND HENCE, DID NOT EXAMINE THE BALANCE DEPOSIT ORS . O N THE BASIS OF REMAND REPORT AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD , IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 37,14,722/ - AND THEREFORE, NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR WITH THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WHICH IS CONFIRMED. THUS, THE G R OUND OF APPEAL O F THE REVENU E IS DISMISSED. 5 ITA NO. 600 / JODH /201 4 8. I N THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON FRIDAY , THE 1 1 TH DAY OF MARCH , 201 6 AT JODHPUR . S D / - S D / - (GEORGE MATHAN) (N.S.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER D ATED : 1 1 TH MARCH , 201 6 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1. THE ASSESS E E. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE D.R . 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER