Shri Sujit Tanajirao Kadam, Satara V. ITO, Pune

ITA 731/PUN/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 56578 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K AMBASTHA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Peak credit
• Section: 142(1); 234B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 731/PN/2010 : A.Y. 2005-06 SHRI SUJIT TANAJIRAO KADAM M/S. SHRIRAM FARMS, MAIN ROAD PUSEGAON, TAL. KHATAV DIST SATARA PAN AQUPK 7420 N APPELLANT VS. I.T.O HQ (CIB) PUNE RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI M.K. KULKARNI RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.K. AMBASTHA DATE OF HEARING: 30-11-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30-11-2011 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-IV PUNE DATED 29-1-2010 FOR A.Y. 20 05-06 CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER IN TAXING THE PEAK CREDITS OF RS 5,05,826/- IN THE BANK TRANSACTIONS. 2. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE AND TRIED TO EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT FROM THE ABOVE ACTIVITIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACC EPT THE SUBMISSIONS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND ASSE SSED THE PEAK CREDIT OF RS. 5,05,816/- AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE BANK. IN APPEAL, THE ACTION OF TH E 2 ITA NO. 731/PN/2010 SUJIT T KADAM A.Y. 2005-06 ASSESSING OFFICER IN TAXING THE PEAK CREDITS OF RS 5,05,826/- IN THE BANK TRANSACTIONS HAS BEEN CONFIR MED BY THE CIT(A). THE SAME HAS BEEN OPPOSED BY THE LEARN ED AR IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFI CER WAS JUSTIFIED IN ARRIVING AT A CONCLUSION BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE BEFORE HER. IT IS A FACT THAT THE ASSESS EE WAS NOT FILING RETURN OF INCOME BEFORE THE ISSUE OF THE NOT ICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT ISSUED ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATIO N RECEIVED U/S 285AB OF THE ACT THAT CASH DEPOSITS IN EXCESS OF RS. 18 LAKHS HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. ALL THE TRANSACTIONS APPEARING IN THE BA NK ACCOUNT WERE IN CASH AND THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO EXPLAIN EACH AND EVERY DEPOSIT AND WITH DRAWAL WITH CREDIBLE EVIDENCE. THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WAS NOT CONVI NCING AND SATISFACTORY. EVEN BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALREADY TAXED THE PE AK CREDIT BEFORE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT AND NOT THE ENTIRE DEP OSITS APPEARING IN THE BANK WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DENIED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE CIT(A) W AS JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN TAXING THE PEAK CREDITS OF RS. 5,05,826/- IN BANK TRANSACTIONS. WE THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMI TY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). THE SAME IS UPHELD. 4. THE NEXT ISSUE PERTAINING TO THE LIABILITY TO PA Y INTEREST U/S 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT IS CONSEQUENT IAL IN 3 ITA NO. 731/PN/2010 SUJIT T KADAM A.Y. 2005-06 NATURE AND NO SEPARATE ADJUDICATION IS REQUIRED ON THE SAME. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN ON 30 TH NOVEMBER 2011. SD/- SD/- (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE DATED THE 30 TH NOVEMBER 2011. ANKAM COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT IV PUNE 4. CIT(A)-III PUNE 5. THE D.R, ITAT PUNE BENCH, PUNE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES, PUNE.