Sh. Janak Raj Rathore, Jammu V. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

ITA 74/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5743 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-02-2018
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S NEGI LD
• Section: 148; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. R.S.SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.74(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008- 09 SH. JANAK RAJ RATHORE NEAR AIRPORT, CHATTAR SINGH PARK, JAMMU PAN:AALPR-7544K VS. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. S.S. NEGI (LD. DR) DATE OF HEARING: 21.02.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 22.02.2018 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE/APP ELLANT, ON FEELING AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18.10.201 6 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-5, LUDHIANA, WHEREIN THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIR MED THE ADDITION OF RS.3,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE OF ASSESSEE. 2. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ALSO ORDER PASSED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AS IT EMERGE D FROM THE PROCEEDINGS BELOW. A SEARCH U/S 132 WAS MADE ON THE ASSESSEE AS A CONSEQUENCE OF SEARCH OPERATION CONDUCTED ON THE TRUST, IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS WORKING. DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION CASH AMOU NTING TO RS.3,92,550/- WAS FOUND AT HIS RESIDENCE. THE LD. AO H AS MADE ADDITION OF RS.3,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH OF RS.3,92,500/- FOUND AT HIS HOME. IT IS ADMITTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN EMPLOYEE AND REGULA RLY FILING HIS RETURN OF INCOME AND HAS MADE CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM HIS BANK ACCO UNT AND MAINTAINED A BALANCE OF CASH IN HAND TO MEET THE EMERG ENCIES AS HE IS A ITA NO.74 /ASR/2017 (A.Y.2008-09) SH. JA NAK RAJ RATHORE VS. DCIT 2 HEART PATIENT WITH ARTERIES BLOCKAGES AND ALSO SUFFERIN G FROM HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE AND DIABETICS. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED BALANCE SHEE T ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME, FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT TO SHOW THE FLOW OF CASH AND BALANCE OF CASH IN HAND IN EACH YEAR, HOWEVER, THE LD. AO WITHOUT POINTING OUT ANY DEFECTS IN SUCH RET URN OF INCOME AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.3,50,00 0/-. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE SAID ADDITION OF RS.3,50,000/- WAS CONFIRMED BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN CASH IN HAND AS ON 31 ST MARCH, 2003 AT RS.6,06,456/- WHICH HAS GONE UP TO RS.10 ,06,698/- AS ON 31.03.2006, HOWEVER, THE BANK STATEMENTS OF THE R ELEVANT BANK ACCOUNTS FROM WHERE THE CASH IS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN WITH DRAWN, HAVE NOT BEEN FILED AND IT WAS ALSO NOT EXPLAINED AS TO WHAT WA S THE SOURCE OF OPENING CASH IN HAND, THERE IS THUS, MERIT IN THE OBSER VATION OF THE AO THAT THE BALANCE SHEET PROVIDED, NOW ARE NOT WORTH RELIANCE , BECAUSE NONE OF THESE WAS EVER FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT ALONG WITH R ETURN OF INCOME AND THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT WHICH CAN EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CA SH ON A PARTICULAR DAY SHOULD START WITH REASONABLE AMOUNT, OTHERWISE ANY AMOUNT OF CASH CAN BE EXPLAINED BY TAKING A HUGE FIGURE OF OPENING CASH IN HAND WHICH HAS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND NEVER REPORT ED TO THE DEPARTMENT. WHILE CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, SPECIF ICALLY MEDICAL HEALTH CONDITION OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE AMOUNT INVOLVED WHICH IS REASONABLE AMOUNT FOR MEDICAL EXIGENCIES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEMONSTRATED HIS GENUINENESS FOR KEE PING CASH AMOUNT AT HIS HOME TO MEET ANY EMERGENCY/EXIGENCY FOR HIS MEDICAL NEEDS AND THE BALANCE SHEET FILED ALONG WITH RETURN OF INCOM E IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT IN ORDER TO SHOW THE FLOW OF CASH AND BALANCE OF CASH IN HAND EACH YEAR CANNOT BE BURST ASIDE ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME WAS NOT REPORTED TO THE DEPARTMENT IN THE PAST, HENCE, WE ARE INCLINED TO DELETE THE ITA NO.74 /ASR/2017 (A.Y.2008-09) SH. JA NAK RAJ RATHORE VS. DCIT 3 ADDITION OF RS.3,50,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER A ND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.02.2018. SD/- SD/- (R.S.SYAL) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) VICE PRESIDENT J UDICIAL MEMBER DATED:22.02.2018 /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) SH. JANAK RAJ RATHORE, JAMMU (2) THE DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU (3) THE CIT(A), J&K, JAMMU (4) THE CIT CONCERNED. (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., AMRITSAR TRUE COPY BY ORDER