DCIT, Circle -52, Kolkata, Kolkata V. Shri Partha Sarathi Ghosh, Kolkata

ITA 757/KOL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 75723514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K CHAKRABORTY
• Assessee Lawyers: SOUMITR A CHOUDHURY

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO.: 757/KOL./201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 PAGE 1 TO 3 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA A BENCH, KOLKATA CORAM : SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. NO.: 757/KOL./ 2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-2008 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,................ ......APPELLANT CIRCLE-52, KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN DAKSHIN, 2, GARIAHAT ROAD (SOUTH), KOLKATA-700 068 -VS.- SRI PARTHA SARATHI GHOSH,.......................... ..........................RESPONDENT 296, N.S.C. BOSE ROAD, KOLKATA-700 047 [PAN: ADVPG 6305 N] APPEARANCES BY: SHRI P.K. CHAKRABORTY, JCIT, SR. D.R., FOR THE DEPA RTMENT SHRI SOUMITRA CHOUDHURY, ADVOCATE, FOR THE ASSESSEE DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JANUARY 16, 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : JANUARY 29, 2014 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEROGE : 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGA INST AN ORDER DATED 27.03.2012 PASSED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXXIII, KOLKATA FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. GRIEVANCE OF REVENUE IS THAT LD. CIT(APPEALS) DELETED AN ADDITION MADE FOR A DISCREP ANCY DETECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BETWEEN THE CLOSING BALANCE AS SH OWN IN THE BOOKS AND IN A BANK ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE WITH M/S. UTI BANK. 2. FACTS APROPOS ARE THAT ASSESSEE HAD FILED HIS RE TURN FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR DECLARING INCOME OF RS.20, 47,990/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSING OFF ICER NOTED FROM THE BALANCE-SHEET FILED BY ASSESSEE THAT CLOSING BALANC E SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST HIS ACCOUNT NO. 053082 WITH UTI BA NK WAS RS.2,17,212/- HOWEVER, AS PER THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CLOSING BALA NCE AS PER THE BANK I.T.A. NO.: 757/KOL./201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 PAGE 1 TO 3 2 STATEMENT CAME TO RS.39,66,149.09. HE, THEREFORE, C ONSIDERED THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.37,48,937/- AS INCOME OF ASSESSEE AND MADE AN ADDITION. 3. ASSESSEE IN HIS APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) A RGUED THAT THE CORRECT BANK BALANCE WAS RS.2,17,212.09 AND THIS WA S EXACTLY SHOWN IN HIS BALANCE-SHEET. ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED A FRESH BANK STATEMENT FROM M/S. AXIS BANK LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS UTI BANK). SI NCE FRESH STATEMENT PRODUCED BY ASSESSEE WAS AT SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE WITH THE EARLIER STATEMENT, CIT(APPEALS) FORWARDED THE FRESH STATEME NT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION. ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE HI S REPORT DATED 20.02.2012 SUBMITTED THAT HE HAD WRITTEN A LETTER T O M/S. AXIS BANK LTD. FOR CONFIRMING THE FRESH STATEMENT GIVEN BY ASSESSE E. IT SEEMS THE BANK VIDE ITS REPLY DATED 01.02.2012 CONFIRMED THE BALAN CE OF RS.2,17,212.09. LD. CIT(APPEALS) THOUGH HE EXPRESSED SURPRISE AT TH E DIFFERENCE IN BALANCES BETWEEN THE BANK STATEMENT INITIALLY SUBMI TTED AND THE BANK STATEMENT LATER SUBMITTED HELD THAT, THERE COULD HO WEVER BE NO ADDITION, SINCE ASSESSEE HAD SUBSTANTIATED THE BALANCE AS APP EARING IN HIS BALANCE- SHEET. THE ADDITION WAS THUS DELETED BY HIM. 4. NOW BEFORE US, LD. D.R. STRONGLY ASSAILING THE O RDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER REQUIRED A F RESH LOOK BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SINCE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAD DELETE D THE ADDITION WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE CLARIFICATION SOUGHT FROM THE BANK. ACCORDING TO HIM, EARLIER BANK STATEMENT WAS ALSO PRODUCED BY THE ASS ESESE AND HENCE, WITHOUT PROPER INVESTIGATION THE MATTER COULD NOT B E CONSIDERED AS RESOLVED. 5. PER CONTRA, LD. AR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD. CI T(APPEALS). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE BANK STATEMENT THAT WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT THE BA LANCE IN ASSESSEES ACCOUNT WAS RS.39,66,149/-. IN THE BALANCE-SHEET OF ASSESSEE, BANK I.T.A. NO.: 757/KOL./201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 PAGE 1 TO 3 3 BALANCE WAS SHOWN AT RS.2,17,212/- ONLY. HOWEVER, D URING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) A SSESSEE HAD PRODUCED A FRESH STATEMENT FROM THE BANK WHEREIN BALANCE WAS RS.2,17,212.09, WHICH TALLIED WITH THE FIGURES SHOWN BY ASSESSEE IN HIS BALANCE-SHEET. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)S ORDER THAT ASS ESSING OFFICER HAD WRITTEN TO THE BANK FOR CONFIRMATION OF THE FRESH B ANK STATEMENT PRODUCED BY ASSESSEE. THE BANK HAD VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 01.02.2012 CONFIRMED THAT THE BALANCE IN THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESS EE AS ON 31.03.2007 AS RS.2,17,212.09. THIS STATE OF AFFAIR HAS NOT BEEN D ISPUTED BY THE REVENUE. THIS BEING THE POSITION, IN OUR OPINION, ASSESSEE H AD PRODUCED SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE BANK BALANCE AS APPEARING IN HIS BALANCE-SHEET. FOR THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE FIGURES AS PER THE ORIG INAL BANK STATEMENT AND THE SUBSEQUENT BANK STATEMENT WHICH WAS RECONFI RMED BY THE BANK, IT IS ONLY FOR THE CONCERNED BANK TO EXPLAIN AND AS SESSEE CANNOT BE PUT ON PERIL. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT LD. CI T(APPEALS) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.37,48.937/-. NO INTE RFERENCE IS REQUIRED. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014. SD/- SD/- GEORGE MATHAN ABRAHAM P. GEORGE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACC OUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, THE 29 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014 COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT(APPEALS) (4) CIT (5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ETC ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA LAHA/SR. P.S.