INDRESH TYAGI, HAPUR V. ITO, WARD- 3(4), HAPUR

ITA 6031/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5805 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2019
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S L ANURAGI
• Assessee Lawyers: RK GARG
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6031/DEL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 INDRESH TYAGI S/O SH. RAMANAND TYAGI VILLAGE- SABLI, DELHI ROAD, HAPUR, C/O R. K GARG, T-314, GANGA PLAZA, BEGUM BRIDGE ROAD, MEERUT PAN NO. ALIPT4501G VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(4) HAPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. R. K. GARG, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. L. ANURAGI, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 08/08/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09/08/2019 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 07.07.2017 OF THE CIT(A), GHAZIABAD REL ATING TO A. Y. 2009-10. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING DID NOT PRESS THE LEGAL GROUND CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR WHICH THE LD. DR HAS N O OBJECTION. ACCORDINGLY GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 BY TH E ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. PAGE | 2 3. IN GROUND NO.2 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE O RDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.21, 03,662/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLA INED CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK. 4. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT ON THE BAS IS OF AIR INFORMATION RECEIVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITE D CASH AMOUNTING TO RS.21,03,662/- IN HIS SAVINGS BANK ACC OUNT IN SYNDICATE BANK, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REOPEN ED U/S. 147 OF THE ACT. NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER NOTICE U/S.142 (1) WAS ALSO ISSUED. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT HIS LAND WAS ACQUIRE D BY HPDA AND PAYMENT HAS BEEN RECEIVED THROUGH CHEQUE WHICH WAS DEPOSITED IN SYNDICATE BANK. HOWEVER, SINCE THE ASS ESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES REGARDING LAN D ACQUIRED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN THE ORDER PASSED U/S.147/ 144, DETERMINED THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.2 1,03,662/-. 5. IN APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE ASS ESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED COMPENSATION ON ACCOUNT OF AC QUISITION OF LAND. ALTHOUGH ALL THOSE DETAILS WERE FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A), HE REJECTED THE SAME ON THE GROUND THAT THESE ARE ALL FRESH EVIDENCES. HE SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION MADE BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER AND SUSTAINED BY THE CIT(A) SHOULD BE DELET ED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION UNDER RULE 29 OF PAGE | 3 THE ITAT RULES FOR PRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENC ES WHICH WERE NOT OBTAINED AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAS OBTAINED THE BANK STATEMENTS NOW UNDER RTI WHICH GIVES THE DETAILS AND, THEREFORE, IN THE INTE REST OF JUSTICE THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES SHOULD BE ADMITTED WHICH GO TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER AND HE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE M ATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND WHILE SUPPORTING TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A) SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 9. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY BO TH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CIT(A) AND THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. I FIND THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS.21,03,662/- T O THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCO UNT MAINTAINED WITH SYNDICATE BANK. ALTHOUGH THE ASSESS EE EXPLAINED THAT THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT O F ACQUISITION OF LAND BY HPDA, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE SAME IN ABSENCE OF ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FILED B EFORE HIM. I FIND THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE ADDITION MADE BY T HE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT IS THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE THAT IN VIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED WHIC H WERE OBTAINED SUBSEQUENT TO THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), HE IS IN A POSITION TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE BEFORE THE ASSESS ING OFFICER. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE A ND IN THE PAGE | 4 INTEREST OF JUSTICE I DEEM IT PROPER TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE A N OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AS PER FACT AND LAW. I HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09.08.2019. SD/- (R.K PANDA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER *NEHA* DATE:- 09.08.2019 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION 07.08.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 07.08.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS /PS 07.08.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 07.08.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/ PS 09.08.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WE BSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. THE DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGIST RAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER