Sh. Sanjiv Sharma, Chandigarh V. ITO, Chandigarh

ITA 602/CHANDI/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9929 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. RANO JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.543/CHD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. SH.SANJIV SHARMA, WARD 4(4), SCO 360, 1ST FLOOR, CHANDIGARH. SECTOR 32-D, CHANDIGARH. PAN: ABZPS4750K & ITA NO.602/CHD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) SH.SANJIV SHARMA, VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SCO 360, 1ST FLOOR, WARD 4(4), SECTOR 32-D, CHANDIGARH. CHANDIGARH. PAN: ABZPS4750K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI S.K. MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 02.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.06.2016 O R D E R PER RANO JAIN, A.M . : BOTH THE CROSS APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S)-2, CHANDIGARH DATED 20.3.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 -10. 2 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE TO THE EXTENT RELEVANT FOR ADJUDICATING THE PRESENT APPEALS ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE WAS MAINTAINING BANK ACCOUNTS WITH ICICI B ANK, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND BANK OF INDIA. IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE ADMITTED TO HA VE MAINTAINED ONLY ONE BANK ACCOUNT WITH BANK OF INDIA . WHEN ASKED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS IN OTHER BANK ACCOUNTS, THE ASSESSEE DI D NOT FILE ANY REPLY. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER T REATED THE DEPOSITS IN THESE BANK ACCOUNTS AS UNEXPLAINED AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.78,28,500/-. 3. BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE MADE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS WITH REGARD TO THE DEPOSITS IN THESE BAN K ACCOUNTS. THESE SUBMISSIONS ARE REPRODUCED B Y THE CIT (APPEALS) IN HIS ORDER FROM PAGES 2 TO 4. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED CETAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES. THE SUBMIS SIONS OF THE ASSESSEE TOGETHER WITH ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE SENT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN REMAND. AS PER TH E REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HE OBJECTED TO THE ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. HOWEVER, THE CI T (APPEALS) PREFERRED TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENC ES AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE A S WELL AS THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, GAVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.48,68,500/- OUT OF ADDITION OF RS.78,28,500/-/. 3 4. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE DEPARTMENT HAS COME UP IN APPEAL AGAINST THE RELIEF PROVIDED BY THE CIT (A PPEALS), WHILE THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE SUSTENA NCE OF PART ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY HIM BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS ) AND REITERATED THE SAME WITH THE HELP OF CHART SHOWING THE DETAILS OF SOURCE OF RELEVANT CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. 6. THE LEARNED D.R. RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT DECLARED ALL THREE BANK ACCOUNTS BEFORE THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER SHOULD BE CONFIRMED. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHO RITIES BELOW AND CONSIDERED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECO RD. AS REGARDS THE AMOUNT OF RS.6 LACS DEPOSITED IN THE AC COUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS ON 19.8.2008, IT WAS SUBMITTED T HAT THE AMOUNT HAS COME FROM ASSESSEES WIFES BANK ACCOUNT . THE ONLY APPREHENSION RAISED BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER IN THE REMAND REPORT WAS THAT THERE WAS A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.1,80,000/- IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE AS ON 13.8.2008. WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE CIT (APPEALS) THAT EVEN IF THERE WAS CASH DE POSIT IN 4 THE BANK ACCOUNT OF WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE AS ON 13.8 .2008, THERE IS AN ENTRY OF RS.6 LACS AS ON 19.8.2008 BY W AY OF CHEQUE IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, THE ONLY O N THE BASIS OF CASH DEPOSITS OF AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,80,000/ - THAT TOO AROUND A WEEK BEFORE TRANSFER TO ASSESSEES ACC OUNT, NO ADVERSE INFERENCE CAN BE DRAWN AGAINST THE ASSES SEE. THEREFORE, WE CONFIRM THE DELETION OF ADDITION MADE BY THE CIT (APPEALS). 8. WITH THE HELP OF CASH FLOW STATEMENT, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED BENEFIT OF OPENING BALANCE OF RS.2,10,000/- AND ALSO CLAIMED THAT HE HAD RECEIVED BIANA OF RS.8 LACS ON 5.4.2008 ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF ONE OF HIS PROPERTIES AND ANOTHER RS.20 LACS AS ON 26.6.2008 O N ACCOUNT OF SALE OF LAND. HERE ALSO, WE ARE IN AGRE EMENT WITH THE ACTION OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IN HOLDING THA T IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE OPENING BALANCE, NO BENEFIT TO THE ASSESSEE CAN BE GIVEN. THE CIT (APPEALS) HAS BEEN FAIR ENOUGH TO GIVEN THE ASSESSE E BENEFIT OF RS.50,000/- WITH RESPECT TO THE OPENING BALANCE. SINCE NO EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE AMOU NT OF RS.8 LACS WAS FILED BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) NOR BE FORE US, WE HEREBY CONFIRM THE ACTION OF THE CIT (APPEALS) I N CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.8 LACS. 9. WITH REGARD TO CASH DEPOSITS OF RS.20 LACS, THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT HE HAD RECEIV ED THIS 5 AMOUNT FROM THE BUYER SHRI LAKHMIR SINGH AND THE PAYMENT WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE BY SHRI LAKHM IR SINGH AFTER WITHDRAWING FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT. IT IS SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) THAT IN THE REM AND REPORT SHRI LAKHMIR SINGH WAS SUMMONED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE HAD SUBMITTED THAT HIS FATHE R HAD SOLD LAND IN MOHALI FOR RS.75 LACS IN APRIL, 2008, WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY CHEQUE THROUGH HIS NEPHEW. AS PER THE AGREEMENT TO SELL, THE REGISTRATION OF THE LAND WAS TO BE DONE BEFORE 30.8.2008. IT IS A FACT ON RECORD THAT SALE DEED IS NOT FINALIZED TILL DATE. SINCE NO EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE SAID CLAIM AND TO PROVE THE GENUIN ENESS OF THE TRANSACTION HAS BEEN FILED, WE DO NOT INTEND TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) IN TH IS REGARD. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS.20 LACS IS H EREBY CONFIRMED. 10. WITH REGARD TO CASH DEPOSITS OF RS.10 LACS AS ON 10.2.2009, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT TH IS AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S P.S. BUILDERS IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS A PARTNER AND WAS BY WAY OF WITHDRAWAL FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S P.S. BUILDE RS ON THE SAME DAY. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT COMMENTED UPON THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IN HIS REMAND REPORT AND FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE BANK ACCOUNT, IT IS CLEAR T HAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.10 LACS WAS WITHDRAWN AS ON 10.2.2 009. 6 IN VIEW OF THIS WE CONFIRM THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT (APPEALS) AND DELETE THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER. 11. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE CROSS APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 7 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2016. SD/- SD/- (H.L.KARWA) (RANO JAIN) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 7 TH JUNE, 2016 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/THE CIT/THE D R. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH