DCIT, New Delhi V. Sh. Sunil Bhalla, New Delhi

ITA 6689/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3159 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH - D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 6689/DEL/20 13 ASSESSMENT YEAR : - 2008-09 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-20, NEW DELHI VS. SUNIL BHALLA W-3/2, WESTERN AVENUE SAINIK FARM, NEW DELHI AFGPB9442N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PER BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ORDER THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT XII NEW DELHI DATED 12 TH AUGUST, 2013 FOR ASSESSMENT. YEAR 2008- 09, CHALLENGING THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.54,9 0,116/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT AND CREDIT CARD EXPENSES. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT RETURN DE CLARING AN INCOME OF RS. 2,00,000/- AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 1,82, 000/- WAS FILED ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, 2008. AIR INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED IN T HIS CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CREDIT CARD PAYMENT / PURCHASE OF UNITS / CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT OF RS. 95,90,116/-. THERE FORE ADDITION WAS ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SHAILESH THAKUR, SR. DR DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI C.S. AGARWAL,, SR. ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING 11/05/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12/05/2017 ITA NO. 6689/DEL/2013 DCIT VS. SUNIL BHALLA PAGE 2 OF 4 MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED MONEY AS PER AIR INF ORMATION. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A BEFORE LD. CIT(A) FOR FILING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. LD. CIT(A) ADMITTED THE ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCES AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCE AND FILE A REMAND REPORT AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BE ING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER GAVE HIS REMAND REP ORT IN WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONSIDERED THE ISSUE IN DETAIL R EGARDING CASH DEPOSITS BY ASSESSEE AND AVAILABILITY OF THE CASH. LD. CIT(A ) CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT AS REPRODUCED ON THE IMPUGNED ORDER ( COPY ALSO FILED BY LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE) AND NOTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE EVIDENCES FILED BY ASSESSEE AND HAS DRAWN NO AD VERSE OPINION REGARDING THE FOLLOWING : 1. MUTUAL FUND INVESTMENT OF RS. 30,00,000/- OUT OF 40,00,000/- 2. ENTIRE CREDIT CARD PAYMENT OF RS. 11,76,616/- 3. CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 28,42,300/- 3. LD. CIT(A) THEREFORE NOTED THAT OUT OF AD DITIONS MADE ON THE BASIS OF AIR, THE ADDITIONS REMAINING WERE AS UNDE R :- 1. CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 15,70,200/- 2. MUTUAL FUND INVESTMENTS OF RS. 10,00,000/- 4. LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND OF RS. 10 LACS. LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE ADDITION OF RS. 10 LACS. 5. LD. CIT(A) THEREAFTER CONSIDERED THE ISSUE OF CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 15,71,200/-.EXPLANATION OF ASSESSEE IS REPRODUCED I N THE IMPUGNED ITA NO. 6689/DEL/2013 DCIT VS. SUNIL BHALLA PAGE 3 OF 4 ORDER. LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE NOTED THAT THE ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THAT WITHDRAWN AFTER THE LAST DATE OF DEPOSITS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A SOU RCE FOR MAKING CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBM ITTED COPIES OF THE LETTERS SENT TO THE BANK WHICH STATES THAT WITHDRAW ALS WAS FOR REPAYMENT OF LOANS WHICH IS EVIDENCE THAT HE HAS BORROWED MON EY AND DEPOSITED THE SAME INTO HIS ACCOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FOUND TO HAVE MERIT AND THE WITHDRAWALS OF RS. 15 L ACS POST LAST DATE OF DEPOSIT IN THE OPINION OF THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS SOURCE OF MAKING CASH DEPOSITS. THEREFORE, CASH WITHDRAWAL S OF RS. 15,00,000/- POST LAST DATE OF DEPOSIT WAS CONSIDERED AS AVAILAB LE TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE TOTAL DEPOSIT OF CASH BANK. LD. CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5.1 AFTER CONSIDERING RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REPORT HAD ACCEPTED SUBSTANTIAL AVAILABILITY OF THE CASH AND CREDIT CARD PAYMENT. THEREFORE REVENUE HAS NO GRIEV ANCE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION TO THAT EXTENT WHICH IS AGREED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO BE DELETED IN TH E REMAND REPORT. LD. CIT(A) ALSO CONSIDERED THE ISSUE OF CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 15,71,200/- AND ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION OF ASSESSEE BASED ON THE L ETTERS SENT TO THE BANK BY THE ASSESSEE IN WHICH NO INFIRMITY HAS BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE LD. DR. SINCE THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE SUBSTANTIA L ADDITION ON THE ITA NO. 6689/DEL/2013 DCIT VS. SUNIL BHALLA PAGE 4 OF 4 BASIS OF THE REMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY ASSESSING O FFICER AGREEING TO AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THAT TH E CASH WITHDRAWAL OF RS. 15,00,000/- POST LAST DATE OF DEPOSIT WAS CONSI DERED FAVOURABLY AND AVAILABLE TO ASSESSEE BASED ON THE EVIDENCE AND MAT ERIAL ON RECORD, THEREFORE THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WI TH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SER IOUS CHALLENGE TO THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), NO INTERFERENCE IS CALL ED FOR IN DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL SAME IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMISS ED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (B.P. JAIN) ( BHAVNESH SAINI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 12/05/2017 *VEENA* COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. PRINCIPAL CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR