Jasti Nageswara Rao, Vijayawada V. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Vijayawada

ITA 686/VIZ/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4042 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री द ु व्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृ ष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.686/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2006-07) Jasti Nageswara Rao D.No.29-5-46 Cherukupallivari Street Vijayawada [PAN : AFQPJ2975Q] Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(4) Vijayawada (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : None प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent by : Shri S.P.G.Mudaliar, DR सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date of Hearing : 14.06.2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.08.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘CIT(A)], Vijayawada in Appeal No.71/CIT(A)/VJA/15-16 dated 18.07.2019 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2006-07. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for the A.Y.2006-07 on 01.08.2007 admitting total income of Rs.1,09,200/- consisting of income from salary of Rs.60,000/- and 2 ITA No.686/Viz/2019, A.Y.2006-07 Jasti Nageswara Rao, Vijayawada income from other sources (printing consultancy) of Rs.49,200/-. The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed on 31.12.2008 determining total income at Rs.15,41,900/-. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer (AO) made the addition of Rs.14,32,699/- towards unexplained credits in the HDFC bank account of the assessee. 2. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the orders passed by the AO. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : 1. Deletion of addition of Rs.14,32,699/-. 2. The appellant has explained through affidavits from Jasti Sabitha, W/o Jasti Nageswara Rao that she has given gifts of Rs.9,08,000/- for the credits in HDFC Bank A/c out of gifts received from her father Veerapanani Siva Rama Krishna that he has given to her Rs.6,79,698/- out of the retirement benefits received from south central railway and also from her brother Veerapanani Suresh Babu Rs.2,00,000/- out of his salary savings on 22.12.2008 before the Assessing Officer, during the assessment proceedings. 3. The learned CIT(Appeals) has not seen the grievances of the petitioner particularly the petitioner has submitted the affidavits from his father-in-law, wife, brother-in-law before the assessing officer, before the completion of the assessment proceedings. The assessing 3 ITA No.686/Viz/2019, A.Y.2006-07 Jasti Nageswara Rao, Vijayawada officer has recorded al the facts of the case in the assessment order but rejected the submission of the petitioner and added the money deposited in bank as undisclosed income on the ground that the petitioner has not told regarding the bank account in which the cash was deposited. The petitioner was subsequently informed the assessing officer that he has forgotten in the first instance since it is closed. The learned CIT(Appeals) has not verified these facts and followed the assessing officer’s order and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the unjust and unlawful addition made by the CIT(Appeals), the appellant is preferring the appeal before you sir, as the learned CIT(Appeals) has not given a speaking order repeated the assessment order of the Assessing Officer. The learned assessing authority has disallowed the amounts deposited in the bank and the Honorable CIT(A), Vijayawada has confirmed the addition on unjust and unlawful grounds, without verifying the affidavits submitted by the petitioner during the course of Assessment proceeding and the learned CIT(A), Vijayawada has not given a speaking order and repeated the view of AO and dismissed the appeal of petitioner. Additional grounds if any, will be submitted at the time of hearing. The assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal in the year 2019. The Tribunal has given sufficient opportunities to the assessee, but he did not turn up inspite of issue of notices. Finally the case was posted for hearing on 14.06.2022. But, neither the assessee nor his representative appeared before the Tribunal to substantiate his case. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of this appeal based on the available records. 4. It was the submission of the Ld.DR that there were some unexplained cash credits in the HDFC bank of the assessee. Therefore, the AO made an 4 ITA No.686/Viz/2019, A.Y.2006-07 Jasti Nageswara Rao, Vijayawada addition of Rs.14,32,699/-. But the assessee has not properly explained about the cash credits. Before the Ld.CIT(A) also, the assessee did not substantiate his case. He further submitted that even before the Tribunal, the assessee did not file any material evidence to substantiate his case. Therefore, the Ld.DR pleaded to uphold the order of the AO. 5. We have heard the Ld.DR. Admittedly, there were some cash deposits found in the bank account of the assessee. When the notice was issued on the assessee to explain the cash credits, he could not substantiate the cash credits. Therefore, the AO made the addition and the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the same. Before us also, he has not filed any material to substantiate his claim. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the assessee has no material to explain the unexplained cash credits. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by the lower authorities and confirm the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 5 ITA No.686/Viz/2019, A.Y.2006-07 Jasti Nageswara Rao, Vijayawada Order Pronounced in open Court on 23 rd August, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (एस बालाकृ ष्णन) (द ु व्वूरु आर.एल रेड्डी) (S.BALAKRISHNAN) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याधयकसदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 23.08.2022 L.Rama, SPS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. ननधधाऩरती/ The Assessee– Jasti Nageswara Rao, D.No.29-5-46, Cherukupallivari Street, Vijayawada 2. रधजस्व/The Revenue – The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Vijayawada 3. आयकर आयुक्त /The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Vijayawada 5. नवभधगीय प्रनतनननध, आयकर अपीलीय अनधकरण, नवशधखधपटणम/ DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 6.गधर्ा फ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधनुसधर / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam