Income Tax Officer-3(4), Lucknow V. Smt. Sindhuja Mishra, Lucknow

ITA 731/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 92154 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 17-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PINKI MAHAWAR
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Gift; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

1 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 NO. 731 /LKW/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR:200 6 20 0 7 INCOME TAX OFFICER, 3 (4), LUCKNOW VS. SMT. SINDHUJA MISHRA, 3 KAPOOR LANE, M. G. MARG, LUCKNOW PAN:AFXPM8692N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI RAKESH GARG , ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY S MT. PINKI MAHAWAR , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 2 1 /0 4 /201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 0 5 /0 6 /201 5 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. T HIS IS REVENU E S APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) I I LUCKNOW DATED 3 0 .0 6 .201 4 FOR A.Y. 200 6 20 0 7 . 2. THE THREE EFFECTIVE GROUNDS RAISED ARE AS UNDER: - I) THE LD. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 21,06,582/ - HOLDING UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT AS GENUINE GIFTS. II) THE LD. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN TREATING GIFTS AS POLITICAL GIFTS IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE NOWHERE CLAIMED IN HER SUBMISSION BEFORE C IT (A) THAT SHE HAS RECEIVED SUCH POLITICAL GIFTS, WHAT SHE HAS STATED IS THAT SHE HAS ONLY RECEIVED GIFTS FROM DIFFERENT 89 PERSONS SO AS TO ACCUMULATE RS. 21,06,582/ - . III) THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN ADMITTING FRESH EVIDENCE WI THOUT REASONABLE CAUSE, THEREBY VIOLATING PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF THE I. T. RULES. 3 . LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INTRODUCED THIS AMOUNT IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM M/S GURU TEG BAHADUR AUTO ENTERPRISES 2 AND ADDITION IN THAT CASE WAS UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNAL. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION, HE SUBMITTED A COPY OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. M/S GURU TEG B AHADUR AUTO ENTERPRISES IN ITA NO. 112/LKW/2011 & CO. NO. 17/LKW/2011 DATED 17.07.2014. HE SUBMITTED THAT IT IS H ELD BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THAT CASE THAT THIS AMOUNT IS BELONGING TO THAT FIRM AND ADDITION WAS UPHELD IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM, ADDITION IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THE HANDS OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE BECAUSE IT WILL AMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. LEARNED DR OF THE REVEN UE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 4 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND FORCE IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS INTRODUCED THIS AMOUNT IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM M/S GURU TEG BAHADUR AUTO ENTERPRISES AND ADDITION IN THAT CASE WAS UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNAL, ADDITION IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THE HANDS OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE BECAUSE IT WILL AMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. ALTHOUGH THE REASONS GIVEN BY LEARNED CIT (A) FOR DELETING THE ADDITION ARE DIFFERENT BUT WE D ECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE FINAL OUTCOME OF HIS ORDER IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 0 5 /0 6 /201 5 *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR