Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, Kanpur V. M/s New Light Institute Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur

ITA 631/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 63123714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 23-02-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P SRIVASTA VA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.631 & 678/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 ACIT-VI KANPUR V. M/S NEW LIGHT INSTITUTE PVT. LTD. 117/N/57, KAKADEO KANPUR TAN/PAN:AABCN6840N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI. Y.P. SRIVASTAVA, D.R. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. ABHINAV MEHROTRA, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING: 25 02 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11 03 2015 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THESE APPEALS ARE PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 2. SINCE THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER, THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF THROUGH THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. WE, HOWEVER, PREFER TO ADJUDICATE THEM ONE AFTER THE OTHER. I.T.A. NO. 631/LKW/2013: 3. THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON A SOLITARY GROUND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.15,36,668/- WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.18 LAKHS DESPITE SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. :- 2 -: 4. THE FACTS IN BRIEF BONE OUT FROM THE RECORD ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING A COACHING INSTITUTE GIVING COACHING TO THE STUDENTS IN MEDICAL COLLEGES, ETC. THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED GROSS RECEIPTS FROM COACHING AT RS.3,07,24,674/- AS AGAINST LAST YEARS GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS.2,54,65,966/-. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED GROSS RECEIPTS UPTO THE DATE OF SURVEY I.E. 19.12.2006 AT RS.2,72,95,842/- WHICH HAS BEEN ENTERED INTO THE COMPUTER. THE SURVEY TEAM HAS OBSERVED THAT THE GROSS RECEIPT WAS OF RS.3,07,87,737/- (CHEQUE OF RS.57,39,179/- AND CASH OF RS.2,50,48,558/-). HE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCY AND IN RESPONSE THERETO IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THERE WAS POSTDATED CHEQUE OF FEES WHICH WERE ALSO KEPT AND THE SURVEY PARTY HAS TAKEN THE AMOUNT AS ON THE DATE OF SURVEY. SOME ADMISSION FORMS BELONGS TO HIGHER AUTHORITIES AND SOME FEES WERE TO BE REFUNDED. TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL THESE ASPECTS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOOK THE GROSS RECEIPT AS ON THE DATE OF SURVEY AT RS.3,02,95,842/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN GROSS RECEIPTS FOR FULL YEAR AT RS.3,07,24,674/-, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN RECEIPT OF RS.4,06,832/- AFTER THE DATE OF SURVEY AND UPTO 31.3.2007. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER EXAMINED THE BANK ENTRIES AND FEE ACCOUNT AND HE NOTED THAT AFTER SURVEY AND TILL 31.3.2007, A SUM OF RS.19,43,500/- WAS DEPOSITED IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCIES AND BEING NOT CONVINCED WITH THE EXPLANATIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ADDED THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.15,36,668/- (RS.19,43,500/- FEE SHOWN AFTER SURVEY (-) RS.4,06,832/-). 5. ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND BEING CONVINCED WITH THE EXPLANATIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, HE DELETED THE ADDITION. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO TAKEN NOTE OF THE SURRENDERED AMOUNT OF RS.30 LAKHS BY THE MANAGER OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO TAKEN NOTE THAT CASH BALANCE AS ON 8.1.2007 AVAILABLE WITH :- 3 -: THE ASSESSEE WAS AT RS.21,92,677/- OUT OF WHICH CASH AMOUNTING TO RS.18 LAKHS HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ON 8.1.2007. THE LD. CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY DELETED THE ADDITION. 6. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER; WHEREAS THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE CASH BOOK, WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT AS ON 6.1.2007 THERE WAS OPENING BALANCE OF RS.19,58,340.40 WHICH WAS LATER ON INCREASED AND AS ON 8.1.2007 THE OPENING BALANCE WAS OF RS21,93,677.20 OUT OF WHICH RS.18 LAKHS WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RAISED A DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO THE CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF RS.19 LAKHS (RS.1 LAKH ON 27.12.2006 AND RS.18 LAKHS ON 8.1.2007)AND THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING SUFFICIENT CASH BALANCE IN THE CASH BOOK, OUT OF WHICH THE AFORESAID AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK. MERE DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT CANNOT BE CALLED TO BE FRESH RECEIPT OF FEES FROM THE STUDENTS. THE ORIGINAL CASH BOOK WAS PRODUCED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING AND COPIES OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE CASH BOOK ARE AVAILABLE AT PAGES 45 AND 46 OF THE COMPILATION OF THE ASSESSEE. COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT IS ALSO PLACED ON RECORD AND FROM A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE BANK STATEMENT AND CASH BOOK, IT IS EVIDENTLY CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING CASH BALANCE IN THE CASH BOOK FOR ITS DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, THE DEPOSIT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE FRESH RECEIPT OF FEES. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS PROPERLY EXPLAINED THE DEPOSITS AND RECEIPTS, THE ALLEGED ADDITION IS NOT CALLED FOR AND WE, THEREFORE, CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS PROPERLY ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE AND WE CONFIRM HIS ORDER. I.T.A. NO. 678/LKW/2013: 7. THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE DELETION OF PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITION OF :- 4 -: RS.15,36,668/-. SINCE THE DELETION OF QUANTUM ADDITION HAS BEEN CONFIRMED IN THE FOREGOING APPEAL, PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. IN THE LIGHT OF THESE FACTS, THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS NO MERIT, AS THE DELETION OF QUANTUM ADDITION HAS BEEN CONFIRMED IN THE FOREGOING APPEAL. 8. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTIONED PAGE. SD/- SD/- [A. K. GARODIA] [SUNIL KUMAR YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:11 TH MARCH, 2015 JJ:2502 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR