Shri Rajesh Jain, Bhopal V. The ITO 2(1), Bhopal

ITA 602/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0984 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AMITA VARSHNEY
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

SMC RAJESH JAIN ITA NO.602 OF 2019 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE SMC BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 602/IND/2019 A.Y. 2013-14 SHRI RAJESH JAIN, BHOPAL PAN ADBPJ3661L :: APPELLANT VS ITO-2(1), BHOPAL :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SMT. AMITA VARSHNEY, CA RESPONDENT BY SHRI ASHISH PORWAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 28. 0 2 .20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03 .0 6 .20 20 O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD. CIT(A)-1, BHOPAL DATED 26.03.2019 PERTAINING TO ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LD. LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN NOT AP PRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE CASH DEPOSIT IN JOINT BANK ACCOUN T WAS PART OF ASSESSEES WIFES BUSINESS RECEIPTS, EVEN WHEN DOCU MENTARY EVIDENCES WERE PRODUCED AND EXPLAINED. 2. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR ALTER AN Y OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE FINAL HEARING IF NECESSARY SO ARISES AT THE TIME OF HEARING. SMC RAJESH JAIN ITA NO.602 OF 2019 2 2. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE AO CONSIDERED DEPOSI T OF CASH IN VIJAYA BANK ACCOUNT, AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME U/S 68 O F THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT IS A JOINT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH HIS WIFE AN D HIS WIFE RUNS A COACHING INSTITUTE AND AS A PROOF OF BUSINESS THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED COPY OF SERVICE TAX REGISTRATION. THE ASS ESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT HIS WIFE IS A TAXPAYER HAVING SOURCE OF INCOME FROM COACHING INSTITUTE, RENTAL INCOME AND BANK INT EREST AND REGULARLY FILES INCOME TAX RETURN. COPY OF ITR, BAL ANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT WAS ALSO ENCLOSED. THE RENT AL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE IS DEPOSITED IN THIS SAVI NG ACCOUNT AND HIS WIFE IS AT LIBERTY TO WITHDRAW OR DEPOSIT FROM HER BANK AS PER HER REQUIREMENT. THEREFORE, IT IS WRONG TO ASSUME T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS SOLE OWNER OF FUNDS IN THE SAID BANK AC COUNT. BUT THE AO DID NOT AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSE E AND MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.1,00,000/-. AGAINST THIS THE ASS ESSEE APPROACHED THE LD. CIT(A) WHO ALSO CONFIRMED THE AD DITION. STILL AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE CASH DOES NOT RELATE TO THE ASSESSEE BUT RELATES TO HIS WIFE WHO WAS CO-OWNER IN THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT BEING A JOINT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH SMC RAJESH JAIN ITA NO.602 OF 2019 3 HIS WIFE AND HIS WIFE RUNS A COACHING INSTITUTE AND AS A PROOF OF BUSINESS, THE ASSESSEE FILED THE REQUISITE EVIDENCE S BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BUT THAT DID NOT CONSIDERED THE SAME WHICH IS UNJUSTIFIED. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. DR RELIED UPON THE OR DERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORDS. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE BEFO RE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES SUBMITTED COPY OF SERVICE TAX REGISTRAT ION RELATING TO COACHING INSTITUTE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THA T HIS WIFE IS A TAXPAYER HAVING SOURCE OF INCOME FROM COACHING INST ITUTE, RENTAL INCOME AND BANK INTEREST AND REGULARLY FILES INCOME TAX RETURN. COPY OF ITR, BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCO UNT WAS ALSO FILED. THE ASSESSEE ALSO EXPLAINED THAT RENTAL INCO ME OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE IS DEPOSITED IN THIS SAVING A CCOUNT AND HIS WIFE IS AT LIBERTY TO WITHDRAW OR DEPOSIT FROM HER BANK AS PER HER REQUIREMENT. ON CONSIDERATION OF THESE FACTS AND CI RCUMSTANCES, I, AM OF THE VIEW, THAT IT IS WRONG TO ASSUME THAT THE ASSESSEE IS SOLE OWNER OF FUNDS IN THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT. THE E VIDENCES AS NARRATED ABOVE CLEARLY ESTABLISH THAT RS.1,00,000/- RELATED TO HER SMC RAJESH JAIN ITA NO.602 OF 2019 4 WIFE BUT THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES FAILED TO CONSIDER THE SAME. THEREFORE, I DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION O F RS.1,00,000/-. 6. IN RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.06.2 020. SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 03 .06.2020 PATEL/PS COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PR.CIT(A)/PR.CIT/DR, INDORE