ACIT, CIRCLE-5, Nagpur V. SMT. SHIRLEY MOOLAND PAUL, Nagpur

ITA 76/NAG/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 93395 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMITAVA BHATTACHARYA
• Assessee Lawyers: J S BHATTI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. BEFORE SHRI MUKUL K. SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. I.T.A. NO. 76/NAG/2013 ASS ESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SMT. SHIRLEY MOOLAND PAUL, CIRCLE-5, NAGPUR. V/S. PLOT NO. 18, SHRIRAM NAGAR, SOMALWADA, W ARDHA ROAD, NAGPUR. PAN AFBPP 6067L APPELLANT. RESPONDENT. APPELLANT BY : SHRI AMITAVA BHATTACHARYA. RESPONDENT BY : SH RI J.S. BHATTI. DATE OF HEARING - 07-05-2015 DATE OF ORDER 20 TH MAY,2015 O R D E R PER SHRI MUKUL K. SHRAWAT, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ARISING FRO M THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS)-19, MUMBAI (CAMP OFFICE NAGPUR) DATED 13-12-2012. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER : 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)-I, NAGPUR ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF ` .25 LACS MADE AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT ON THE LAST D AY OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR THE CHEQUE NO. 704730 DTD. 31.03.2009 WAS ISSUED T O M/S PIX TRANSMISSION LTD. WHICH WAS NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS OF M/S KARISHMA INVESTMENT, THE PROPRIETARY CONCERN OF THE ASSESSE E. 2 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACT IN DEL ETING THE ADDITION OF ` .25 LACS MADE AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN HOLDING THA T THE ASSESSEE M/S KARISHMA INVESTMENT, HAS NEVER ACCEPTED THESE MONE Y AND THE CHEQUE WAS RETURNED IS NOT MISCONCEIVED AS THE CONTRA ENTRY W AS PASSED ON 30.06.2009 BY RETURNING THE CHEQUE, THEREFORE, THE CHEQUE WAS HELD BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THREE MONTHS. 2. FACTS IN BRIEF AS EMERGED FROM THE CORRESPONDING ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) DATED 29-12-2011 WERE THAT THE ASSESSEE IN INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY IS WORKING AS VICE PRESIDENT IN PIX TRANS MISSION LTD., NAGPUR AND DECLARED AN INCOME OF ` .34,45,620/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ENQUIRED AB OUT THE INVESTMENT IN M/S PIX TRANSMISSION WHICH WAS IN THE NAME OF PROPRIETARY CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE CALLED KARISHMA INVESTMENT S. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PERUSED THE BALANCE-SHEET AND THE ACCOUNTS OF THE A SSESSEE VIS--VIS THE CONFIRMATION OF ACCOUNT RECEIVED FROM PIX TRANSMISS ION. THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE OF ` .25 LAKHS BETWEEN THE BALANCE IN THE RESPECTIVE ACC OUNTS WHICH WAS FURTHER ENQUIRED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT PIX TRANSMISSION HAD ISSUED A CHEQUE OF ` .25 LAKHS OF STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD TOWARDS REFUND OF LOAN OF KARISHMA INVESTMENTS. HOW EVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT CONVINCED AND IN HIS OPINION ON ONE HAND TH ERE WAS NO BALANCE OUTSTANDING IN THE BOOKS OF M/S PIX TRANSMISSION BU T THE ASSESSEES BOOKS HAVE SHOWN AN OUTSTANDING BALANCE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS HELD THAT THE SAID DISCREPANCY HAS INDICATED THAT THERE WAS AN INVESTM ENT OUT OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AMOUNTING TO ` . 25 LAKHS, WHICH WAS FINALLY TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FIRST APP ELLATE AUTHORITY, THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE POSITION OF ACCOUNTS IN BOTH THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS 3 WHICH WERE DULY CONSIDERED AND THE ADDITION WAS DEL ETED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: IN APPEAL IT IS SUBMITTED THAT : THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED HEREWITH THE COKPY OF L EDGER OF KARISHMA INVESTMENT IN THE BOOKS OF PIX TRANSMISSION LTD. FOR THE PERIOD OF F.Y. 2008-09 AND 2009-10. THAT THE PIX TRANSMISSION LTD . HAD ISSUED A CHEQUE NO. 704730 DTD. 30.03.2009 OF ` .25,00,000/- TO KARISHMA INV ESTMENT TOWARDS REFUND OF LOAN. THAT THIS REFUND OF LOAN W AS NOT REQUIRED BY ASSESSEE AT THAT TIME SO THE SAME WAS RETURNED TO PIX TRANSMISSION LTD. THAT THE PIX TRANSMISSION LTD. DEBITED THE AMOUNT IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ON ISSUE OF CHEQUE. HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE HAD NO RE ASON TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS AMOUNT AS THE AMOUNT WAS NEVER RECEIVED BY THE ASS ESSEE AND THE CHEQUE WAS RETURNED. THE ERROR WAS ON THE PART OF PIX TRA NSMISSION LTD. WHICH WAS LATTER RECTIFIED BY THEM. THAT THIS CAN BE VEREIFI ED WITH COPY OF LEDGERS OF KARISHMA INVESTMENT IN THE BOOKS OF PIX TRANSMISSI ON LTD. ENCLOSED HEREWITH. THE FACT IS THAT THIS CHEQUE WAS NEVER E NCASHED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF FACT, THE ASSESSEE MOST HUMBLY REQUEST THE DUE RELIEF BE GIVEN AND THE ADDITION OF ` .25,00,000/- BE DELETED. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE , THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT AND ASSESSMENT ORDER. I HAVE GONE THROUG H THE COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT OF KARISHMA INVESTMENT FOR F.Y. 2008-09 AN D 2009-10. FROM LEDGER ACCOUNT, IT IS NOTICED THAT ON 31.03.2009 ENTRY IS MADE TO PD CQ. 704730 DTD. 31.03.2009 AND ON 30.06.2009 ANOTHER ENTRY IS MADE STATING CHEQUE RETURNED CQ 704730 DTD. 30-06-2009. THIS FACT CLE ARLY SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NEVER ACCEPTED THIS MONEY AND THE CHE QUE WAS RETURNED. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT CORRECT IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF ` .25,00,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. HENCE, THE ADDITION OF ` .25,00,000/- STANDS DELETED. GROUND NO. 4 IS ALLOWE D. 4. HAVING HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES A ND AFTER PERUSING THE RELEVANT ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED IN THE COMPILATION FILE D BEFORE US, WE HEREBY HOLD THAT LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION. THE IMPUGNED 4 CHEQUE WAS NOT TRANSACTED OR TENDERED IN THE BANK F OR ENCASHMENT. THEREFORE, THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE IN THE OUTSTANDING BALANCES. HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS DULY RECONCILED BY PROPER EXPLANATION. WE, THEREFORE, FI ND NO FALLACY IN THE FACTUAL FINDING OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS). SAME IS HEREBY CON FIRMED AND THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. SD/- SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (MUKUL K. SHRAWAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER. NAGPUR, DATED: 20 TH MAY, 2015. COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT, NAGPUR. 5. THE D.R., ITAT, NAGPUR. 6. GUARD FILE. T RUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, WAKODE ITAT, NAGPUR