SHRI PRAVIN RAJENDRA SINGH, Mumbai V. THE ITO 3(2), Bhopal

ITA 785/IND/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99191 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: D PATWA
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

PRAVIN RAJENDRA SINGH ITA NO. 785/IND/2014 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, INDORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 785/IND/2014 A.Y. 2009-10 PRAVIN RAJENDRA SINGH NAVI MUMBAI ::: APPELLANT VS INCOME TAX OFFICER 3(2) BHOPAL ::: RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI ASHISH GOYAL AND SHRI .D. PATWA RESPONDENT BY SHRI R.A. VERMA DATE OF HEARING 17.12.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17.12.2015 O R D E R THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-II, BHOPAL DATED 25.9. 2014. PRAVIN RAJENDRA SINGH ITA NO. 785/IND/2014 2 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL I.E. GROUND N O. 1 IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMI NG THE ADDITION OF RS.2,36,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.7.2009 DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 3,70,797/- FROM M/S CROMPTON GREAVES LIMITED. AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE APPELLANT HAS PURCHASED AN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY FOR RS.31,86,250/- DURING THE YE AR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED T OTAL AMOUNT OF RS. 6,09,127/- AS UNEXPLAINED IN THE HANDS O F THE ASSESSEE AND MADE ADDITIONS ACCORDINGLY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WANTED TO VERIFY RS. 3,73,127/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITED IN THE INVESTMENT AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION U/S 69 OF THE AC T. AGAINST THIS ADDITION, THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFOR E PRAVIN RAJENDRA SINGH ITA NO. 785/IND/2014 3 THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED A CHART SHOWING CASH FLOW STATEMENT WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE CASH DEPOSITED O N 31.7.2008 WHICH IS REFLECTED AT PAGE 14 OF THE PAPER BOOK. SIMILARLY CASH WAS DEPOSITED ON 1.8.2008 OF RS. 43,000 /- WHICH IS ALSO EXPLAINED AT PAGE 14 OF THE PAPER BOOK. SIMILARLY, CASH OF RS.1,08,000/- WAS DEPOSITED ON 31.7.2008 WHICH WAS ALSO DEPOSITED OUT OF CASH WITHDR AWAL FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT. 5. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT VERIFIED THE ABOVE FACTUAL POSITION. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THER EFORE, PLEADED THAT THIS MATTER MAY BE SENT TO THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION. THE LEARNED DR HAS NO OBJECTION TO THIS. PRAVIN RAJENDRA SINGH ITA NO. 785/IND/2014 4 6. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, I SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF TH E ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION OF THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. IF THE ASSESSEE SATISFIES THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ABOUT THE SOURCE OF THE CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK, NO ADDITION NEEDS TO BE SUSTAINED. I ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 17 TH DECEMBER, 2015 SD/- (D.T. GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER 17 TH DECEMBER, 2015 DN/-