M.Geetha Rani, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward 12(3), Hyderabad

ITA 711/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 71122514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 23-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJAT MITRA
• Assessee Lawyers: V RAGHAVENDRA RAO
• Keywords: Salary income; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 711/HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 M. GEETHA RANI, HYDERABAD. PAN AIPPM 4467 J VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 12(3), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI V. RAGHAVENDRA RAO REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJAT MITRA DATE OF HEARING 23-03-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01-04-2015 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 20/02/2013 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-II, HYDERABAD FOR T HE AY 2009-10. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS WITH REFERENCE TO ADDITION OF AN AMOUNT OF RS. 60 LAKHS AT THE HA NDS OF ASSESSEE. 3. BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE, ASSESSEE AN INDIVIDUAL WA S A DIRECTOR IN M/S BPR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. AND DERIVED INCOME FROM SALARY. FOR THE AY UNDER CONSIDERATION, ASSESSEE FILED HER RETURN O F INCOME ON 31/07/2009 DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 4,41,636. AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, ON VERIFICATION OF THE INFOR MATIONS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, AO FOUND THAT ASSESSEE WAS MAINTAINING T HREE BANK ACCOUNTS AS UNDER: 1. SB ACCOUNT NO. 867810110002627 BANK OF INDIA 2 ITA NO. 711 /HYD/2013 M. GEETHA RANI 2. SB ACCOUNT NO. 129510025020748 ANDHRA BANK, AT TAPUR BRANCH 3. SB ACCOUNT NO. 01/00019264 ANDHRA BANK, NAMPAL LY BRANCH. WHEN AO CALLED UPON ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS, ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED, ALL THE TRANSACTIONS INCLUDING CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK AC COUNTS WERE RELATING TO SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY AND THE SAID PERS ON HAS ALSO ADMITTED THE SAME BEFORE AO IN COURSE OF HER ASSESS MENT PROCEEDING AND ACCORDINGLY THESE DEPOSITS/WITHDRAWAL IN THE BA NK ACCOUNTS WERE CONSIDERED AT THE HANDS OF SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY WH ILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT IN HER CASE BY ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE I, HYDERABAD. IN SUPPORT OF SUCH SUBMISSIONS, ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A L ETTER DATED 06/09/2010 FILED BEFORE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, H YDERABAD IN COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING INCASE OF SMT. BADDAM KALA VATHY WHEREIN THE SB A/C NO. 867810110002627 WITH BANK OF INDIA, ATTAPUR BRANCH WAS MENTIONED. ON THE BASIS OF THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY ASSESSEE, AO CALLED FOR INFORMATION FROM THE CONCERNED AO, WH O ASSESSED SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY AND AS STATED BY AO, THE CONCERNED AO I.E. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, VIDE LETTER DATED 07/12/2011 CO NFIRMED THAT CASH DEPOSITS IN SB A/C OF BANK OF INDIA, ATTAPUR AND AN DHRA BANK, ATTAPUR BRANCH HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AT THE HANDS OF SMT. B ADDAM KALAVATHY WHILE COMPLETING ASSESSMENT U/S 153A OF T HE ACT. HOWEVER, AO OBSERVED THAT AS FAR AS BANK ACCOUNT IN ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH IS CONCERNED, THE CONCERNED ACIT, C ENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 DID NOT CONFIRM THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED THEREIN WAS CONSIDERED AT THE HANDS OF SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY. A O FURTHER OBSERVED, EVEN IN THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY IN COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING RELATI NG TO HER, IT WAS NEVER MENTIONED THAT THE DEPOSITS IN ANDHRA BANK, N AMPALLY BRANCH ACCOUNT ARE HER INCOME AND WAS OFFERED AS UNDISCLOS ED INCOME. HE ALSO OBSERVED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED IN CAS E OF SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE DEPOSIT S MADE IN SB A/C 3 ITA NO. 711 /HYD/2013 M. GEETHA RANI HELD IN ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH AND WHETHER IT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED AT THE HANDS OF SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY. T HEREFORE, AO TREATING CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 60 LAKHS MADE INTO TH E SB A/C ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH AS UNEXPLAINED ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF ASSESSEE. BEING AGGRIEVED OF SUCH ADDITION, ASSE SSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A). 4. IN COURSE OF HEARING OF APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) , ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE AO. LD. CIT( A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF ASSESSEE IN THE CONT EXT OF MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, CONFIRMED THE ADDITION WITH TH E FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS: 6.1 NEITHER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NOR IN THE LETT ER FILED BY SMT. B. KALAVATHY, THE DETAILS OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF VARIOUS PARTIES WHOSE INCOME HAS BEEN OFFERED WERE FURNISHE D. IT WAS ONLY AS A GENERAL STATEMENT IT WAS MENTIONED THAT T HE CASH DEPOSITS APPEARING IN THE NAME OF SMT. GEETHA RANI WERE MADE OUT OF THE CASH ON HAND HELD BY HER. IT MAY BE NOTE D THAT NO WHERE THE DETAILS OF THE BANK ACCOUNTS AND WHAT AMO UNTS WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE ASSESSMEN T BEFORE THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1. I HAVE BEEN FURNISHED AND THE VERY FACT THAT THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, VIDE LETTER DTD. 07/12/2011 CONFIRMED THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE SAVINGS BAN K ACCOUNTS OF BANK OF INDIA AND ANDHRA BANK, ATTAPUR BRANCH HA VE BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A OF SMT. B. KA LAVATHY CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE AMOUNTS APPEARING IN THE SAV INGS BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT WITH ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCHG HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS THE INCOME OF SMT. B. K ALAVATHY IN HER HANDS. EVEN DURING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS BEFOR E ME ALSO, NEITHER SRI B. PRAKASH REDDY NOR HIS WIFE SMT. KALA VANTHY SUBSTANTIATED THE CLAIM OF THE AMOUNT APPEARING IN THIS PARTICULAR ACCOUNT AS BEING THEIR INCOME AND THE SA ME HAS BEEN OFFERED TO TAX, WITH ANY EVIDENCE. THE VERY FACT TH AT SMT. B. KALAVATHY HAD OFFERED THE AMOUNTS APPEARING IN THE OTHER TWO ACCOUNT AS HER INCOME IN HER ASSESSMENT AND NOT OWN ING UP THE AMOUNT APPEARING IN THIS PARTICULAR ACCOUNT SHO WS THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 60 LAKHS APPEARING IN ACCOUNT NO. 01/ 00019264 WITH ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH IS UNACCOUNTED AN D THEREFORE HAS TO BE TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE ACCOU NT HOLDER I.E., THE APPELLANT. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO OF RS. 60 LAKHS TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT REMAI NED UNEXPLAINED AND IS THEREFORE CONFIRMED. 4 ITA NO. 711 /HYD/2013 M. GEETHA RANI 5. LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US, DURING THE ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDING ASSESSEE HERSELF HAS OFFERED AN EXPLANATION ABOUT T HE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS INTO THE SB A/C AND HAS ALSO EXPLAINED THA T THE SAID ACCOUNTS THOUGH STOOD IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE, BUT, THE TRANSACTIONS THEREIN WERE MADE BY SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY. IT WAS SUBMITTED, IN COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING OF SMT. BADDAM KALA VATHY, SHE OWNED UP THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE SB A/C HELD IN TH E NAME OF ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY, INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT HE R HAND. LD. AR SUBMITTED, WHEN AO HAS FOUND ASSESSEES CLAIM IN RE SPECT OF TWO SB A/CS. TO BE CORRECT, THERE IS NO REASON WHY ASSESSE ES EXPLANATION IN RESPECT TO THE REMAINING ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE ACC EPTED. IT WAS SUBMITTED, ONLY BECAUSE THERE IS NO REFERENCE TO TH E SAID BANK ACCOUNT EITHER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER OR THE EXPLA NATION SUBMITTED BY SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY IT WILL NOT FOLLOW THAT TH E AMOUNT WAS NOT ASSESSED AT THE HANDS OF SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY. LD. AR SUBMITTED, IN FACT, DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING OF THE PR ESENT ASSESSEE, SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY CONFIRMED THAT THE CASH DEPOS ITS MADE IN SB A/C AT ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH WERE ACTUALLY M ADE BY HER AND SHE HAS OFFERED IT AS INCOME AT HER HANDS. IN THIS CONTEXT, LD. AR REFERRED TO THE LETTER DATED 14/12/2011 OF SMT. BAD DAM KALAVATHY, A COPY OF WHICH IS AT PAGE 10 OF THE PAPER BOOK. LD. AR, THUS, SUBMITTED, WHEN ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HER ONUS IN PROVING THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT, AO I S NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING IT AS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS. IT WAS SU BMITTED, IF AT ALL ANY ADDITION IS WARRANTED, IT SHOULD BE MADE AT THE HAN DS OF SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY AND NOT ASSESSEE. IN SUPPORT OF SUCH CONT ENTION, LD. AR RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: 1. CIT VS. DURGAPRASAD MORE, 82 ITR 504 2. CIT VS. P.K. NOORJAHAN, 237 ITR 570 3. DWARKADHISH SUGAR INDUSTRIES VS. ITO 23 TAXMANN .COM (TM) LD. AR ALSO RELIED UPON THE THIRD MEMBER DECISION OF ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN CASE OF ZUARI LEASING & FINANCE CORPN.LTD. VS. ITO, [2008] 5 ITA NO. 711 /HYD/2013 M. GEETHA RANI 112 ITD 205 (DELHI)(TM) TO SUBMIT THAT THE TRIBUNAL SHOULD DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERIT IN STEAD OF REMITTING THE MATTER TO AO. FURTHER LD. AR RELIED UPON A DECISION OF ITA, MUMBAI BENCH IN CASE OF VIJAY KUMAR SARDA VS. DCIT, 40 TAXMANN.COM 113 (MUM.) TO CONTEN D THAT APPELLATE AUTHORITY CAN ONLY GIVE DIRECTION TO AO I N REGARD TO ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM AND NOT IN RESPECT OF THIRD PER SON, WHOSE APPEAL IS NOT PENDING BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 6. LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY SUPPORTING T HE REASONING OF THE AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A) SUBMITTED BEFORE US, T HERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE AND HRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH ACCOUNT WERE OFFERED BY SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY AT HER HAND IN HER ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING. HE SUBMITTED , AS ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO BRING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO PROVE THIS FACT, ADDITION MADE IS JUSTIFIED. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIE S AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS OTHER MATERIALS ON RECORD. THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT INCOURSE OF AS SESSMENT PROCEEDING, AO FOUND THREE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNTS ST ANDING IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY ASSESSEE BEFO RE AO THAT THE DEPOSITS/WITHDRAWALS MADE IN THE SAID SB A/CS WERE ACTUALLY RELATING TO SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY AND NOT ASSESSEE. IT WAS F URTHER STATED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE AO THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN G OF SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY, SHE HAD ACCEPTED THE TRANSACTION IN THE AFORESAID BANK ACCOUNTS AND THE SAME WERE OFFERED AS ADDITION AL INCOME. HOWEVER, AS CAN BE SEEN, ASSESSEES AFORESAID EXPLA NATION WERE FOUND TO BE CORRECT ONLY IN RESPECT OF SB A/C HELD IN BANK OF INDIA AND ANDHRA BANK, ATTAPUR BRANCH. WHEREAS, AS FAR AS SB A/C HELD IN ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH IS CONCERNED, INFORMAT IONS SUPPLIED BY CONCERNED AO, WHO MADE ASSESSMENT IN CASE OF SMT . BADDAM KALAVATHY DID NOT CONFIRM THE FACT THAT THE DEPOSIT S IN ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH ACCOUNT WERE ALSO CONSIDERED IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 153A OF THE ACT IN CASE OF SMT. BADDA M KALAVATHY. 6 ITA NO. 711 /HYD/2013 M. GEETHA RANI THERE WAS ALSO NO OTHER MATERIAL ON RECORD WHICH CA N EITHER PROVE OR CONFIRM THE FACT THAT THE DEPOSITS/WITHDRAWALS MADE IN ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH ACCOUNT WERE CONSIDERED AT THE HAND S OF SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT IN HER CASE. 8. WHEN THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT CASH D EPOSITS TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 60 LAKHS WERE FOUND IN A BANK ACCOUNT STANDING IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE, PRIMARY ONUS IS ON ASSESSEE TO PR OVE THE SOURCE OF SUCH DEPOSITS WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. IN THE PRESENT CASE, OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL A S IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) CLEARLY DEMONSTRATE THAT ASSESSEE HAS NO T BEEN ABLE TO ESTABLISH THE FACT THAT DEPOSITS OF RS. 60 LAKHS WE RE EITHER OFFERED AS INCOME BY SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY OR WAS ASSESSED IN HER HANDS. EVEN BEFORE THIS FORUM ALSO, APART FROM A COPY OF L ETTER DATED 14/12/2011 CLAIMED TO BE OF SMT. KALAVATHY, ASSESSE E HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE FACT THAT CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 60 LAKHS WERE EITHER OFFERED BY SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY AS HER INCOME OR W ERE ASSESSED AT HER HANDS BY FURNISHING ANY CONCLUSIVE AND COGEN T EVIDENCE. MOREOVER, AS CAN BE SEEN, IT IS THE CLAIM OF ASSESS EE THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 60 LAKHS WAS DEPOSITED BY SMT. BADDAM KALAVA THY IN CASH IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE ENTIRE AMOUNT WAS RETURNED BACK TO HER BY WAY OF SELF-WITHDRAWALS. HO WEVER, ON A PERUSAL OF THE BANK ACCOUNT COPY, IT IS FOUND THAT CHEQUES FOR RS. 9 LAKHS AND RS. 8 LAKHS WERE ISSUED TO ONE SHRI K. NI TYA REDDY ON 10/06/08. THEREFORE, ASSESSEES EXPLANATION THAT EN TIRE AMOUNT WAS PAID BACK TO SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY THROUGH SELF WIT HDRAWALS IS ALSO NOT CORRECT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WHEN ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE FACT THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 60 LAKHS ACTUALLY BELONGED TO SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY AND ASSESSED AT H ER HAND, ADDITION, IN OUR VIEW, IS JUSTIFIED. AS FAR AS THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY ASSESSEE ARE CONCERNED, ON CAREFUL EXAMINATION, THEY WERE FOUND TO BE FACTUALLY DISTINGUISHABLE. SUFFICE TO SAY, TH E RATIO LAID DOWN IN THESE DECISIONS ARE ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS INVOL VED THEREIN AND WILL 7 ITA NO. 711 /HYD/2013 M. GEETHA RANI NOT APPLY UNIFORMLY TO ALL CASES. IN THE FACTS OF T HE PRESENT CASE, AS ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO BRING ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO CONCLUSIVELY PROVE THE FACT THAT THE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 60 LAK HS MADE INTO THE ANDHRA BANK, NAMPALLY BRANCH ACCOUNT WAS ACTUALLY M ADE BY SMT. BADDAM KALAVATHY AND ASSESSED AT HER HANDS, ASSESS EES CLAIM CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDE R OF LD. CIT(A). 8. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST APRIL, 2015. SD/- SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 1 ST APRIL, 2015 KV COPY TO:- 1) M. GEETHA RANI, C/O I.R. RAO & COMPANY, CAS., C- 69, MADHURANAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 038 2) ITO, WARD 12(3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD 3 CIT(A)-II, , HYDERABAD 4) CIT-I, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDE RABAD. DESCRIPTION DATE INTLS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON SR.P.S. 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR SR.P.S 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER VP 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S./PS SR.P.S. 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.P S. 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.P.S. 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER