SHRI TOLARAM SUKHWANI, Ujjain V. THE ITO 2(1), Ujjain

ITA 806/IND/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5986 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 08-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 23-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE (SINGLE MEMBER CASE) BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO.806/IND/2014 A.Y. : 2001-02 SHRI TOLARAM SUKHWANI, ITO, 99,ALAKHDHAM NAGAR, VS 2(1), UJJAIN. UJJAIN APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN NO. ATWPS6082R A PPELLANT BY : SHRI SUMIT NEMA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA , DR O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), UJJAIN, DATED 26.09.2014 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2001-02. 2. THIS APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 4 DAYS. TO THIS EFFEC T THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FILE D AN DATE OF HEARING : 08 .0 6 20 16 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08 .0 6 . 201 6 SHRI TOLARAM SUKHWANI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, - I.T.A.NO. 806/IND/2014 A.Y. 2001-02 2 2 APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY STATING THAT T HE RELEVANT PAPERS DULY SIGNED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE CHALLAN OF I.T.A.T. FEE WERE RECEIVED BY HIM ON 19.12.2014 BY LATE EVEN ING. SINCE 19 TH DEC.,2014 WAS FRIDAY, THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILE D ON THAT DAY. THEN THE COUNSEL WAS OUT OF STATION FOR TH REE DAYS FROM 20 TH DEC.2014 TO 22 ND DEC.,2014, ON ACCOUNT OF WINTER VACATIONS OF THE HIGH COURT. AN AFFIDAVIT TO THIS E FFECT IS FILED BY SHRI SUMIT NEMA. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THE DELAY WAS NOT INTENTIONAL O R DELIBERATE. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR T HE ASSESSEE PRAYED FOR CONDONATION OF 4 DAYS DELAY IN FILING TH E APPEAL. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE AND PERUSED THE AFFIDAVIT. I FOUND THAT TH E DELAY HAS OCCURRED DUE TO REASONABLE CAUSE. I CONDONE THE DEL AY OF FOUR DAYS. 4. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVES INCOME FROM ACCOUNT WRITING. DURING THE YEAR , THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF HOUSE A T 99, ALAKHDHAM COLONY, UJJAIN AMOUNTING TO RS. 5,35,000/ - AND FURTHER MADE INVESTMENT OF RS. 2,00,000/- ON CONSTR UCTION OF SHRI TOLARAM SUKHWANI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, - I.T.A.NO. 806/IND/2014 A.Y. 2001-02 3 3 FIRST FLOOR, THUS, TOTALLING TO RS. 7,35,000/-. FOR THE ALLEGED AMOUNT, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT HE HAS MADE THE IN VESTMENT OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF HOUSE AT 12, LEELA SHAH COL ONY, UJJAIN, FOR RS. 4,00,000/- AND RS. 3,35,000/- OUT OF THE AM OUNT RECEIVED FROM HIS FATHER. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED RS. 4 LAKHS FROM HIS FATHER. THEREFORE, THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS. 4 LAKHS TO HIS INC OME. 5. THE MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CI T(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE DOES NOT PRESS THIS GROUND OF RS. 4 LAKHS, BUT AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS I NVESTED RS. 5,35,000/- AND RS. 2,00,000/- FOR CONSTRUCTION OF F IRST FLOOR IN 2005, THUS, TOTALLING TO RS. 7,35,000/- FOR THE HOU SE. THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED RS. 4 LAKHS AS SALE PROCEEDS OF HOUSE AT 12, LEELA SHAH COLONY, UJJAIN. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALS O RECEIVED RS. 3,35,000/- OUT OF THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM LATE SHRI VEERUMAL, WHO DIED ON 15.8.1997. THUS, THE ASSESSEE OUT OF RS. 7,35,000/- HAS EXPLAINED THE INVESTMENT OF RS.4 ,00,000/-. THEREFORE, REMAINING AMOUNT HAS TO BE EXPLAINED BY THE SHRI TOLARAM SUKHWANI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, - I.T.A.NO. 806/IND/2014 A.Y. 2001-02 4 4 ASSESSEE. OUT OF RS. 3,35,000/-, THE ASSESSEE HAS E XPLAINED RS. 2 LAKHS WHICH WAS INVESTED NOT IN 2001, BUT IN 20 05, WHICH IS APPARENT FROM THE INSPECTORS REPORT AT PAGE 47 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE RETURNED INCO ME AT RS. 30,000/- IN HIS RETURN, WHICH CAN BE SAID TO BE ATTRIBUTABLE TOWARDS THE INVESTMENT. THEREFORE, AMO UNT REMAINS TO BE EXPLAINED IS AT RS. 1,05,000/-, OUT O F WHICH RS. 5,000/- CAN ALSO BE ATTRIBUTABLE TOWARDS PAST SAVING . THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,00,000/- IS SUSTAI NED AND RS. 3 LAKHS IS DELETED. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1 LAKHS IS TO BE ADDED AS INCOME OF THE ASSE SSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OP EN COURT ON 8 TH JUNE, 2016, SD/- ( D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 8TH JUNE, 2016. SHRI TOLARAM SUKHWANI, UJJAIN VS. ITO, - I.T.A.NO. 806/IND/2014 A.Y. 2001-02 5 5 CPU*