Nandkishor L. Agrawal, Jalna V. Income-tax Officer,

ITA 794/PUN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0641 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-11-2018
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT DUA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A , PUNE , , . , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO , AM . / IT A NO. 794 /P U N/201 5 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 SHRI NANDKISHOR L AGRAWAL D - 16, ADDL.MIDC, AURANGABAD ROAD, JALNA. . / APPELLANT PAN: A DPPA7327N VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 1(3), JALNA . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AMIT DUA, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 2 8 . 1 1 .201 8 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 03 . 1 2 .201 8 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J M : TH E APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS AGAINST ORDER OF CIT (A) - 1 , AURANGABAD , DATED 27 . 0 3 .201 5 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 10 - 11 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND S OF APPEAL: - IT A NO. 794 /P U N/20 1 5 NANDKISHOR L AGRAWAL 2 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.36,00,000/ - FROM SANDEEP AGRAWAL U/S 68. APPELLANT PRAYS TO DELETE THE SAME. 2. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ADDED IN NOT VERIFYING SAND EEP AGARWALS BALANCE SHEET WITH WARD 1(3), JALNA. 3. APPELLANT PRAYS FOR JUST & EQUITABLE RELIEF. 4. APPELLANT PRAYS FOR CANCELLATION OF INTEREST U/S 234B. 3. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING FIRST ON 13.06.2017 AND THE SAME WAS ADJOURNED TO 30.08.2017 AT THE REQUEST OF ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI S.N. PURANIK HAD APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. ON 30.08.2017, 13.11.2017, 15.11.2017 AND 05.02.2018, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. MEANWHILE, SHRI S.N. PUR ANIK STATED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT HE WAS NOT APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE AND HE WITHDREW HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY. THEREAFTER, NOTICE WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO THROUGH LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE FOR HEARING ON 16.04.2018 ; BUT NONE APPEARED ON THE SAID DATE AND THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED TO 26.06.2018, 19.09.2018 AND THEREAFTER TO 28.11.2018. VARIOUS NOTICES HAVE BEEN RETURNED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES AND THE LAST NOTICE HAS BEEN RETURNED WITH REMARK LEFT. THE RETURNED E NVELOPE ALONG WITH AD ARE PLACED ON RECORD. THE COUNSEL SHRI S.N. PURANIK AGAIN CONFIRMED THAT HE WAS NOT APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE , IN RESPONSE TO CALL FROM THE OFFICE OF LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE PR OCEED TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEAL EX - PARTE THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE. 4. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF 36 LAKHS UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. IT A NO. 794 /P U N/20 1 5 NANDKISHOR L AGRAWAL 3 5. BRIEFLY, IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN LOAN RECEIVED FROM SHRI SANDEEPJI AGRAWAL. THE SAID LOAN OF 36 LAKHS WAS RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR AND THE CLOSING BALANCE AS ON 31.03.2010 WAS 31 LAK HS. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH CONFIRMATION LETTER AND HE FILED SOME DOCUMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE SAID CONFIRMATION LETTER DID NOT BEAR SIGNATURE OF THE LENDER, HIS PAN NUMBER AND ADDRESS OF LENDER. SINCE NO PROPER CONFIRMATION LETTER WAS FILED, THE ADDITION OF 36 LAKHS WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT TREATING THE SAID LOAN AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. 6. IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT HE WAS MAKING TRANSACTION WITH SAME CREDITOR SINCE LONG BACK AND IN T HE NEXT YEAR, HE HA D MADE SOME RE PAYMENTS. THE CIT(A) NOTES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FILE ANY CONFIRMATION DULY SIGNED FROM THE LENDER AND HENCE, HAS NOT PROVED THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR, GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION AND CAPACITY OF THE LENDER TO ADVANCE THE SAID LOAN. NO FURTHER DOCUMENT WAS FILED IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND HENCE, THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ADDITION OF 36 LAKHS UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 7. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 8. BEFORE US , THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY CONFIRMATION OF THE SAID LOAN CREDITOR NOR HAS DISCHARGED THE ONUS CAST UPON HIM TO ESTABLISH THE IDENT ITY OF THE CREDITOR, CAPACITY OF CREDITOR AND HENCE THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION IS NOT PROVED. CONSEQUENTLY, WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE APPEAL OF IT A NO. 794 /P U N/20 1 5 NANDKISHOR L AGRAWAL 4 ASSESSEE AND THE SAME IS REJECTED. THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS HENCE, UPHELD. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY AS SESSEE ARE THUS, DISMISSED. 9 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 3 RD DAY OF DECEMBER , 201 8 . SD/ - SD/ - ( D.KARUNAKARA RAO ) (SUSHMA CHO WLA ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; DATED : 3 RD DECEMBER , 201 8 . GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 1 , AURANGABAD ; 4. THE PR. CIT - 1 , AURANGABAD ; 5. 6. , , / DR A , ITAT, PUNE ; / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE