Shri Tansukhbhai Madhabhai Vaniya, Surat V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-6(4), Surat

ITA 804/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9543 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 03-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P L KUREEL
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68; 6

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA K. YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 804/AHD/2012 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 TANSUKHBHAI MADHABHAI VANIYA, 30-31, THAKORDWAR ROW HOUSE, GADODRA ROAD, PARVAT GAM SURAT 394 170 .. APPELLANT PAN : APUPV 2848 L VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6 (4), SURAT .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI M.K. PATEL, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI P.L. KUREEL , SR - DR / DATE OF HEARING 03/02/2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12/02/2016 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-IV, SUR AT, DATED 25.01.2012 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, ON THE FOLL OWING GROUNDS. 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE AC TION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.11,9 3,200/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 6 8 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 2. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ABOVE ADDITION MAY PLEASE BE DELETED AS LEARNED MEMBERS OF THE TRIBUNAL MAY D EEM IT PROPER. (SMC) ITA NO. 804/AHD/2012 TANSUKHBHAI MADHABHAI VANIYA VS. ITO AY : 2007-08 2 2. IN THIS CASE, THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESS EE IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS.11,93,200/- MADE BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER U/S 68 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. 2.1 THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS ING OFFICER HAD THE INFORMATION THAT THE APPELLANT HAD SAVING B ANK ACCOUNT WITH ICICI BANK, BADRA (EAST), MUMBAI IN W HICH CASH OF RS.11,93,200/- WAS DEPOSITED DURING THE YEAR UND ER CONSIDERATION. ON VERIFICATION, IT WAS FOUND BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.11,93,200/- WAS NOT S HOWN IN THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CON SIDERATION. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CONCLUDED THAT THE SUMS DEPOSITED IN THE SAID ACCOUNT WERE THE UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.11,93,200/-. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED TH E SAME. 2.2 THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US HAS BEEN TH AT HE WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY SUCH TRANSACTIONS WITH REGARD TO T HE BANK DEPOSIT OF RS.11,93,200/- WITH ICICI BANK AND HE HA D INQUIRED WITH THE BANK SO THAT EXPLANATIONS COULD BE FURNISH ED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER FAILED TO PROVIDE ANY COPY OF INFORMATION BASED ON WHICH HE ASSUMED B ANK DEPOSITS OF RS.11,93,200/- IN THE ACCOUNT OF THE AS SESSEE. THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW SHOW THAT NO SUCH D ETAILS WERE FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, I SET ASIDE (SMC) ITA NO. 804/AHD/2012 TANSUKHBHAI MADHABHAI VANIYA VS. ITO AY : 2007-08 3 THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO INQUIRE THE SO-CALLED DEPOSIT OF RS.11,9 3,200/- WITH ICICI BANK AND IN CASE IF IT IS FOUND THAT THE AMOU NT IN QUESTION PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSEE, DUE ACTION SHOUL D BE TAKEN AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE A SSESSEE. IN CASE IF IT IS FOUND THAT THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION DOE S NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE, THEN PROPER ACTION MAY BE TAKEN AS PER LAW IN THE RESPECTIVE HANDS IN WHOSE NAME THE ACCOUNT HAS BEEN OPENED AND OPERATED, OF COURSE, AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE CONCERNED. SINCE I AM RESTORING T HE MATTER ON TECHNICAL ISSUE, I AM REFRAINING TO COMMENT ON THE MERIT OF THE ISSUE AT HAND. 3. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 12TH FEBRUARY, 201 6 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- ( SHAILENDRA K. YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 12/02/2016 BIJU T., PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ! ' ' # / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' ' # ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. &'( ! , ' ! , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. (- . / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) !', / ITAT, AHMEDABAD