SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR, AJMER V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BEAWAR

ITA 804/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5981 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 03-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MAHLA JCIT DHK
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 143(3); 244A; 69

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA -@ ITA NO. 804/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'KZ@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR, C/O PROP. M/S PARIHAR KISAN SEWA KENDRA, 11, NEAR GOPINATH MANDIR, SADAR BAZAR, BANDANWARA, AJMER. C UKE VS. I.T.O. WARD-2, BEAWAR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA -@THVKBZVKJ LA -@ PAN/GIR NO.: AMBPP 4880 A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKS J LS @ ASSESSEE BY: SHRI MAHENDRA GARGIEYA (ADV) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI A.K. MAHLA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 24/09/2019 MN?KKS 'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25/09/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31/08/2017 OF LD. CIT(A), AJMER FOR THE A.Y. 2014-15. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS AND DISALLOWANCES MADE IN THE ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 04.10.2016 ARE BAD IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE, FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION AND VARIOUS OTHER REASONS AND HENCE THE SAME KINDLY BE DELETED. 2. RS.5,07,250/-: THE ID. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN PARTLY CONFIRMING ADDITION UP TO RS.5,07,250/- AS ITA 804/JP/2017 SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR VS ITO 2 AGAINST ADDITION OF RS.6,06,202/- U/S 69 AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT MADE BY THE AO. THE ADDITION SO MADE AND PARTLY CONFIRMED BY THE ID. CIT(A) IS CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. HENCE, THE SAME KINDLY BE ALLOWED. 3. THE ID. AO FURTHER ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S 234A, 23AB, 234C & 234D OF THE ACT AND AS ALSO IN WITHDRAWING INTEREST U/S 244A OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT TOTALLY DENIES ITS LIABILITY OF CHARGING AND WITHDRAWAL OF ANY SUCH INTEREST. THE INTEREST SO CHARGED/WITHDRAWN, BEING CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AND FACTS, KINDLY BE DELETED IN FULL. 4. THE APPELLANT PRAYS YOUR HONOUR INDULGENCES TO ADD, AMEND OR ALTER OF OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING. 2. GROUND NO. 1 OF THE APPEAL IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SPECIFIC ADJUDICATION. 3. GROUND NO. 2 OF THE APPEAL IS REGARDING ADDITION OF RS. 5,07,250/- SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) U/S 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT) ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND PROPRIETOR OF M/S PARIHAR KISAN SEVA KENDRA. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 28/11/2014 DECLARING INCOME FROM PETROL PUMP, BANK INTEREST AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME, TOTAL AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,46,890/-. DURING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, THE A.O. NOTED THAT AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED CASH IN HIS SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT OF RS. 73,40,180/-. THE A.O. FURTHER NOTED THAT APART FROM THE CASH DEPOSITED ITA 804/JP/2017 SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR VS ITO 3 IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO DEPOSITED CASH IN THE CURRENT ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED WITH ICICI BANK AND IDBI BANK. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS AS SALE PROCEEDS OF PETROL PUMP. THE A.O. NOTED THAT THE BUSINESS OF PETROL PUMP OF THE ASSESSEE WAS COMMENCED IN OCTOBER, 2013 AND THEREFORE, ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT PRIOR TO 14/10/2013. THE ASSESSEE CAME OUT WITH AN EXPLANATION THAT THE SOURCE WAS OPENING CASH BALANCE OF RS. 6,06,202/- AS ON 01/4/2013. THE A.O. DID NOT ACCEPT THIS EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE AND MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,06,202/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF RS. 5,07,250/- PRIOR TO 14/10/2013. 4. BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FILING REGULAR INCOME TAX RETURN FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 TO 2014-15, THE TOTAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME IS SUFFICIENT TO HAVE OPENING CASH BALANCE OF RS. 6,06,202/- AS ON 01/4/2013. THE LD AR HAS REFERRED TO THE DETAILS OF THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THESE ASSESSMENT YEARS AND CONTENDED THAT ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED RETURN OF INCOME WHICH ITA 804/JP/2017 SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR VS ITO 4 IS SUFFICIENT TO EXPLAIN THE OPENING CASH BALANCE THEN THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN IN THE RECEIPT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN PAST OF RS. 70,000/- WAS DECLARED FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THUS ALL THESE FACTS ESTABLISHED THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE LD AR HAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT EVEN IF A REASONABLE AMOUNT IS CONSIDERED AS DRAWINGS IN EACH YEAR THERE WILL BE SUFFICIENT SURPLUS WITH THE ASSESSEE AS AN OPENING BALANCE AS ON 01/4/2013. THUS, THE LD AR HAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN REGULARLY FILING RETURN OF INCOME AND DECLARING TAXABLE INCOME, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) MAY BE DELETED. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED FOR THE PRECEDING YEAR SHOW THE MINIMUM INCOME AND THEREFORE, AFTER CONSIDERING THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES, NO SURPLUS OF CASH IS GENERATED. THE A.O. AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY BALANCE SHEET WITH THE DEPARTMENT FOR ANY OF THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS THEN THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE. HE HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE A.O. HAS ACCEPTED THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT MADE IN ITA 804/JP/2017 SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR VS ITO 5 THE BANK ACCOUNT AFTER 14/10/2013 WHEN THE BUSINESS OF PETROL PUMP WAS COMMENCED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE A.O. HAS TAKEN UP THE SCRUTINY OF THE CASH DEPOSITED PRIOR TO 14/10/2013 I.E. 01/4/2013 TO 13/10/2013. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT AS OPENING CASH BALANCE OF RS. 6,06,202/-. HOWEVER, THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS ONLY RS. 5,07,250/-. THE A.O. AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF OPENING BALANCE FOR WANT OF PRODUCTION OF BALANCE SHEET FOR THE PRECEDING YEARS WITH THE DEPARTMENT. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT WHEN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PRECEDING YEARS WERE NOT TAKEN UP FOR SCRUTINY AND THE RETURNS WERE FILED ELECTRONICALLY THEN THERE WAS NO OCCASION FOR THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE BALANCE SHEET ALONGWITH THE RETURN. THE A.O. HAS NOT DISPUTED THE FILING OF THE RETURNS BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECLARING POSITIVE INCOME IN ALL THESE YEARS. DETAILS OF THE TOTAL INCOME AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 TO 2013-14 ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: A.Y. TOTAL AMOUNT (RS.) AGRICULTURAL INCOME (RS.) 2010-11 173360 50000 2011-12 183500 55000 2012-13 172980 60000 2013-14 186428 65000 2014-15 356893 70000 ITA 804/JP/2017 SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR VS ITO 6 FROM THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME DECLARED FOR ALL THESE YEARS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING SOME INCOME AS SAVING FOR EACH YEAR AFTER INCURRING HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE, THEREFORE, A SUM OF RS. 5,07,250/- AS FOUND DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT FROM 01/4/2013 TO 13/10/2013 CAN BE SAFELY EXPLAINED FROM THE PAST SAVINGS OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN REGULARLY FILING RETURN OF INCOME AND ALSO SHOWING THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME FOR EACH YEARS, THE AMOUNT OF TOTAL INCOME ALONGWITH AGRICULTURAL INCOME, IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, IS SUFFICIENT TO EXPLAIN THE CASH BALANCE WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR MAKING DEPOSIT OF THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS. 5,07,250/-. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS DELETED. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019 SD/- FOT; IKY JKO (VIJAY PAL RAO) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 25 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR, AJMER. ITA 804/JP/2017 SHRI KAILASH CHAND PARIHAR VS ITO 7 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE I.T.O. WARD-2, BEAWAR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 804/JP/2017) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR