ITO, New Delhi V. Shri Inderpal Singh Suchar, New Delhi

ITA 809/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 53372 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 22-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SALIL MISRA
• Keywords: Business income; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 133(6); 68; 144

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 809/DEL/2011 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 809/DEL/2011 A.Y. : 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 25(4), 304-D, 3 RD FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, NEW DELHI VS. SH. INDERPAL SINGH SUCHAR, A-5B/262, SFS FLATS, PASCHIM VIHAR, NEW DELHI 110063 (PAN/GIR NO. : AIVPS8001N) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SH. SALIL MISRA, 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 06.12. 2010 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED READ AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN: (I) DELETING THE ADDITION OF ` 50,00,000/- EVEN WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE ITA NO. 809/DEL/2011 2 SOURCE OF RECEIPT OF THE SAID CHEQUES AMOUNTING TO ` 50 LACS CREDITED IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT AND DISHONORED LATER. (II) NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ONLY SALARY AND INTEREST INCOME DURING THE YEAR AND DEPOSIT OF SUCH HUGE CHEQUES IS QUESTIONABLE, SPECIALLY WHEN THE SOURCE OF THOSE CHEQUES DEPOSITS REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. (III) THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE RIGHT TO AMENDED/ ADD ANY OTHER GROUND OF APPEAL. 3. IN THIS CASE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 144 OF TH E IT ACT. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT S HOWN ANY OTHER BUSINESS INCOME. BANK STATEMENT CALLED FOR FROM BA NK U/S 133(6) REVEAL THAT ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSIT IN HIS SAVING BANK A/C OF ` 85,14,182/- OUT OF WHICH ` 10,02,200/- WAS DEPOSIT AS CASH. SO URCES OF THESE TRANSACTIONS WAS NOT EXPLAINED. ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED A SUM OF ` 85,14,182/- AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE B Y INVOKING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. ITA NO. 809/DEL/2011 3 4. UPON ASSESSEES APPEAL LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SUSTAINED THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF ` 3088182/- AND DELETED A SUM OF ` 5426000/-. 5. REVENUE IS IN APPEAL WITH REGARD TO DELETION OF 50 LACS. ON THIS ACCOUNT ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT ASSESSEE HAS RE CEIVED A CHEQUE OF ` 30 LACS AND PRESENTED TO THE BANK ON 11.5.2005 . THEREAFTER THE CHEQUE IN QUESTION WAS DISHONORED AND CORRESPONDING DEBIT ENTRY WAS MADE TO HIS ACCOUNT ON 11.5.2005 ITSELF. SIMILARLY, A NOTHER CHEQUE OF 20 LACS DEPOSITED ON 12.5.2005 WAS ALSO DISHONORED AND DEBIT ENTRY WAS MADE ON 12.5.2005 ITSELF. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOUND MERIT IN THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THIS ADDITION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN MA DE IN THE ASSESSEES CASE. ACCORDINGLY, HE DIRECTED FOR DELET ION OF THE ADDITION IN THIS REGARD. 6. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEA L BEFORE US. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, IN O UR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE MATTER CAN BE DISPOSED OF BY HEARING TH E LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSING THE RECORDS. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE ANY EXPLANATION REGARDING THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT, BUT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT THE CHEQUE WA S DISHONORED. FROM ITA NO. 809/DEL/2011 4 WHOM THE CHEQUE WAS RECEIVED; ON WHAT ACCOUNT THE C HEQUE WAS RECEIVED; WHETHER IT REPRESENT ANY OTHER INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE OR NOT. THIS ASPECT HAS NOT BEEN EXAMINED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). HENCE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OP INION, THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE AFRESH, BY CALLING UPON THE NECESSARY EXPLANA TION OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE REMIT THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NEEDLESS TO ADD THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE S TANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22/12/2011, UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - [ [[ [C.L. SETHI C.L. SETHI C.L. SETHI C.L. SETHI] ]] ] [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 22/12/2011 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES