Shri Mahesh Kumar Modi, Mandsaur V. The ACIT, Ratlam

ITA 641/IND/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 64122714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 24-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 31-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S S DESHPANDE
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

MAHESH KUMAR MODI ITA NO. 641/IND/2013 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 641/IND/2013 A.Y.2005-06 MAHESH KUMAR MODI MANDSAUR PAN AGBPM 7233N ::: APPELLANT VS ASSTT.COMMR. OF INCOME TAX RATLAM ::: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI S.S.DESHPANDE RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 24 .9.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24 .9.2015 O R D E R PER SHRI B.C. MEENA, AM THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), UJJAIN, DATED 5.6.201 3. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS ABOUT CONFIRMING THE MAHESH KUMAR MODI ITA NO. 641/IND/2013 2 ADDITION OF RS.4,80,000/- AS UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT. T HE ASSESSEE HAS INVESTED IN A PLOT OF LAND AND CONSTRUCTED HOUSE THEREON. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT BELIEV E THE ASSESSEES REPLY REGARDING INVESTMENT OF RS.4,80,000/ - BY THE MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE SMT. KAMLA. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBMITTED DETAILS OF SOURCE OF INCOME OF HIS MOTHER. HE OBSERV ED THAT THE RETURN OF HIS MOTHER DECLARING INCOME AT RS.50,0 00/- AND RS. 60,000/- IN THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 AND 2005-06, RESPECTIVELY, WERE FILED BUT THESE RETURNS WERE FILED AFTER THE SURVEY. ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADD ITION. 2. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEES MOTHER HAS CASH WITHDRAWAL S FROM HER ACCOUNT TO EXPLAIN THE INVESTMENT. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT SHE HAS WITHDRAWN CASH FROM THE ACCOUNT AS UNDER :- MAHESH KUMAR MODI ITA NO. 641/IND/2013 3 RS.1,62,080/- 07.08.2000 RS.50,000/- 07.08.2000 RS.48,000/- 06.09.2000 RS.47,000/- 11.09.2000 RS.85,000/- 13.08.2001 (CHEQUE ISSUED FOR PURCHASE OF LAND) RS.19,950/- 31.12.2004 RS.48,600/- 04.12.2004 RS.4,60,630/- THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT T HE LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE UPHELD THE ADDITION IN VIEW OF SUFFICIENT CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM HIS MOTHERS ACCOUN T TO EXPLAIN THE INVESTMENT MADE IN HOUSE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES. ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE HAD CASH WITHDRAWAL OF RS.4,60,360/- FROM THE ACCOUNT DURING THE PERIOD STAR TING MAHESH KUMAR MODI ITA NO. 641/IND/2013 4 7.8.2000 TO 4.12.2004. THESE FACTS HAVE NOT BEEN VERI FIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, AFTER HEARING B OTH THE SIDES, WE FIND IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO WITHDRAWAL OF CASH FROM HER MOTHERS ACCOUNT TO EXPLAIN THE INVESTMENT. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2015 SD SD (D.T. GARASIA) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 5 TH OCTOBER, 2015 DN/-