ITO, New Delhi V. Shri Neeraj Behl, New Delhi

ITA 808/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 58816 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 14-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R S NEGI
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 808/DEL/2011 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 808/DEL/2011 A.Y. : 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 25(4), 304-D, 3 RD FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, NEW DELHI VS. SHRI NEERAJ BEHL, A-2/59, PASCHIM VIHAR, NEW DELHI -0 110 063 PAN/GIR NO. : AIZPB6886B) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SH. VED JAIN, AND SMT. RANO JAIN, CA DEPARTMENT BY : SH. R.S. NEGI, SR. D.R. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 23.11. 2010 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED READ AS UNDER:- (I) DELETING THE ADDITION OF ` 34,00,220/- BY ADMITT ING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN CONTRAVENTION OF RULE 46A OF THE IT RULES, 1962. (II) NO CONSIDERATION THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER WHERE IT HAS BEEN CATEGORICALLY POINTED O UT THAT THE SOURCES OF CASH DEPOSITS REMAINS UNEXPLAINED. ITA NO. 808/DEL/2011 2 3. IN THIS CASE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S. 144 OF TH E IT ACT AT A TOTAL TAXABLE INCOME OF ` 44,69,330/-. 4. UPON ASSESSEES APPEAL LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) GRANTED PART RELIEF. IT IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF ` 34,00,220/- THAT REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. THE REV ENUES CONTENTION IS THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN CONTRAVENTION OF RULE 46A OF THE IT RUL ES, 1962. IT HAS FURTHER BEEN CONTENDED THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHERE IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THE COURSE OF THE CASH REMAIN UNEXPLAINED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE R ECORDS. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED BEFORE US THE REMA ND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS REGARD, WHICH READS AS U NDER:- TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEAL (XXIV), NEW DELHI SIR, SUB:- REMAND REPORT :- APPEAL NO. 234-08-09 IN CASE OF NEERAJ BEHL FOR ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07 REMAND REPORT REGARDING. ITA NO. 808/DEL/2011 3 KINDLY REFER TO C.I.T.(A)-XXIV/2009-10/193 DATED 23.11.2009 ADVISING TO FURNISH REMAND REPORT ON THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION REGARDING ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE UNDER RULE 46A OF THE IT ACT. THIS OFFICE HAS NOT OBJECTION FOR ADMITTING FRESH EVIDENCE, AS THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE U/S. 144 OF THE IT ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SALE AND PURCHASE OF OLD CARS AND COMMISSION AGENT. THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE KINDLY BE ADMITTED AS:- THE APPELLANT HAS NOW FURNISHED CASH FLOW STATEMENT S. THE CASH FLOW STATEMENTS GOT TALLIED WIT THE BANK STATEMENTS OBTAINED U/S. 133(6) OF THE IT ACT JUST BEFORE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT. SINCE THIS IS THE FIRST SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, THE B ENEFIT OF THE OPENING CASH BALANCE HAS TO BE ALLOWED THE A SSESSEE HAS ALSO FURNISHED CONFIRMATION FROM HIS MOTHER FOR RAISING ` 9,80,000/- FROM GE COUNTRYWIDE. SINCE THE MONEY HAS BEEN ROUTED THROUGH STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD, THE GENUINENESS IS ACCEPTABLE. AS CONFIRMATION FROM GE MO NEY IS NOW FILED. 6. A PERUSAL OF THE REMAND REPORT AS ABOVE, THERE I S NO VIOLATION OF RULE 46A IN THIS REGARD AND ASSESSING OFFICER AC CEPTED THE VERACITY OF THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION IN THIS REGARD. IN T HIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THER IS NO GROUND IN THE REVENUES APPEAL BE ING SUSTAINED ANY MORE. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT C ONTROVERT THIS ITA NO. 808/DEL/2011 4 ASPECT. HENCE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN T HE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND ACCORDINGLY , WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29/2/2012, U PON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- [ [[ [A.D. JAIN A.D. JAIN A.D. JAIN A.D. JAIN] ]] ] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE 29/2/2012 SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR COPY COPY COPY COPY FORWARDED TO: FORWARDED TO: FORWARDED TO: FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES