VIKAS PUROHIT, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 811/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5383 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA JCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: RITUL PATWA
• Keywords: Source of fund
• Section: 68

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 VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMB ER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 811/JP/2015 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11. SHRI VIKAS PUROHIT, 2/297, VIDYADHAR NAGAR, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(3), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AQLPP 2637 D VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RITUL PATWA (C.A.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJ MEHRA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 15/02/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/04/2016. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A)-3, JAIPUR DATED 16.10.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. T HE SOLITARY GROUND RAISED IS AS UNDER :- ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD . CIT (A) HAS PASSED A PERVERSE ORDER, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SU BMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE RELATING TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND EVIDENCE & CONFIRMATION RECEIVED FROM THE FAMILY AND FRIENDS R EGARDING PAYMENT RECEIVED BY HIM IN CASH FOR A SUM TOTAL OF RS. 3,70 ,518/-. 2. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT T HE ASSESSEE WAS WORKING AS ASSISTANT MANAGER IN ICICI BANK. IT WAS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN TAKING CASH THROUGH CREDIT CARD SWIPE, FROM HAPPY LIFE SOL UTION RS. 9,82,556/-, ANIL KUMAR SUNIL KUMAR RS. 1,89,454/-, SATISFACTION ELECTRONIC S RS. 1,12,244/-, ELECTRO PLAZA RS. 2 ITA NO. 811/JP/2015 SHRI VIKAS PUROHIT VS. ITO JAIPUR. 1,01,920/-, AND MAKE MY TRIP RS. 78,600/-, THUS A T OTAL AMOUNT OF RS. 14,64,774/- WAS RECEIVED IN CASH THROUGH SWIPE OF CREDIT CARDS. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED CASH FROM CLOSE RELA TIVES AND THEIR CLOSING BALANCES ARE VIKRAM PUROHIT (BROTHER) RS. 1,46,500/-, RAVI R S.69,350/-, MAYA DEVI (MOTHER) RS. 1,09,500/- AND RAJENDRA KUMAR PAREEK (FATHER) R S. 45,168/-, A TOTAL SUM OF RS. 3,70,518/-. IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT, OPENING CAS H BALANCE OF RS. 3,80,606/- AND CLOSING CASH BALANCE IN HANDS AT THE END OF FINANCI AL YEAR HAS ALSO BEEN SHOWN OF RS. 4,25,272/-. 3. ON SCRUTINY OF THE RECORD, IT WAS FOUND THAT ALL EGED CASH RECEIPT FROM RELATIVES AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,70,518/- AS MENTIONED ABOVE, WER E NOT THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS AND WERE ONLY THROUGH CASH. THE CASH BOOK OF THE ASSESSEE WAS COMPARED WITH HIS DAILY TRANSACTIONS AND VARIOUS DEFICIENCIE S WERE NOTICED. A CHART THEREOF IS REPRODUCED BY THE AO IN HIS ORDER. THE AO HELD THA T THE ASSESSEES VERSION WAS NOT RELIABLE BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS :- CASH THROUGH CREDIT CARD SWIPE, FROM HAPPY LIFE S OLUTION RS. 9,82,556/-, ANIL KUMAR SUNIL KUMAR RS. 1,89,454/-, SATISFACTION ELECTRONICS RS. 1,12,244/-, ELECTRO PLAZA RS. 1,01, 920/-, AND MAKE MY TRIP RS. 78,600/-, THUS A TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS. 14,64 ,774/- WAS RECEIVED IN CASH THROUGH SWIPE OF CREDIT CARDS. FURTHER, TH E ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED CASH FROM CLOSE RELA TIVES AND THEIR CLOSING BALANCES ARE VIKRAM PUROHIT (BROTHER) RS. 1 ,46,500/-, RAVI RS.69,350/-, MAYA DEVI (MOTHER) RS. 1,09,500/- AND RAJENDRA KUMAR PAREEK (FATHER) RS. 45,168/-, A TOTAL SUM OF RS. 3, 70,518/-. IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT, OPENING CASH BALANCE OF RS. 3,80,60 6/- AND CLOSING CASH BALANCE IN HANDS AT THE END OF FINANCIAL YEAR HAS ALSO BEEN SHOWN OF RS. 4,25,272/-. IT CAN BE EASILY SEEN THAT THE CASH BOOK IS FABRICA TED AND NOT BASED ON ACTUAL TRANSACTION WHICH IS NOT RELIABLE EXTENT TO SATISFACTION AND NOT JUSTIFIABLE FOR THE SOURCE OF FUNDS. IN REGARD TO O PENING AND CLOSING BALANCES OF CASH SHOWN IN CASH FLOW STATEMENT ARE T OTALLY BASELESS, AS THE ASSESSEE IS SALARIED PERSON AND RECEIVE A NOMIN AL SALARY FOR FULL TIME WORK WHICH DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT AND MADE WITHDRAWALS TO 3 ITA NO. 811/JP/2015 SHRI VIKAS PUROHIT VS. ITO JAIPUR. FULFILL HIS HOUSEHOLD NEEDS. AS MODUS-OPERANDI LEAR NT FROM THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, TO MAKE OUTSTANDING PA YMENTS HE USED EVERY TIME CREDIT CARDS FOR CASH RECEIPT FROM PRIVA TE CONCERNS, AND TO MAKE PAYMENT TO IT, HE USED AGAIN CREDIT CARD FOR R ECEIPT OF CASH FROM ANOTHER PRIVATE CONCERN. THUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO CASH WITH HIM EXCEPT RECEIPT AGAINST SWIPE OF THE CREDIT CARDS, THEREFORE IT IS NOT JUSTIFIABLE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD OPENING AND C LOSING CASH BALANCES. FURTHER, AS THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE MA DE CASH TRANSACTIONS THROUGH YES BANK LIMITED TO THE TUNE O F RS. 16,50,530/- AND ICICI BANK LIMITED RS. 2,63,362/- AND SOURCE EX PLAINED AGAINST THESE TRANSACTIONS ARE CONSIDERABLE ONLY EXTENT TO THE CARD SWIPE FROM VARIOUS CONCERNS TO THE TOTAL OF RS. 14,64,774/- AS MENTIONED IN PARA 2.1 ABOVE. IN REGARD TO REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 4,4 9,118/- THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION FOUND NOT SATISFACTORILY. THE REFORE, THE BALANCE OF RS. 4,49,118/- ARE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED CASH C REDITS IN THE MEANING OF SECTION 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 A ND THE SAME IS ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, THE AO ADDED THE AMOUNT OF RS. 3,70,518/-. 4. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL BEFOR E LD. CIT (A), WHERE THE ADDITION WAS CONFIRMED. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT H IS FATHER SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR PAREEK AT THE RELEVANT PERIOD WAS MANAGER IN STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR AND HAS SUFFICIENT CASH WITHDRAWALS AND THE AMOUNT WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE FOR SHARE APPLICATION MONEY ON BEHALF OF HIS FATHER. SIMILARL Y, IN RESPECT OF HIS MOTHER SMT. MAYA DEVI, ASSESSEE PAID THE MONEY FOR SHARE APPLIC ATION. SIMILARLY, ASSESSEES BROTHER SHRI VIKRAM PUROHIT WAS MANAGER IN RELIANCE CAPITAL AND HAS SUFFICIENT CASH WITHDRAWALS AND FROM FRIEND SHRI RAVI PARASRAMPURIA , A TOTAL SUM OF RS. 3,70,518/- WAS RECEIVED. ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS WERE FILED. THE ISSUE PERTAINS TO SECTION 68 WHEREAS THE DEFICIENCIES HAVE BEEN POINTED OUT IN T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. SINCE THE DEPOSITS IN CASH FROM NEAR RELATIVES IN SMALL AMOUN T, DETAILS AND SOURCES THEREOF HAVE BEEN DULY FURNISHED, WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN CONSI DERED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION IS UNJUSTIFIED AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 4 ITA NO. 811/JP/2015 SHRI VIKAS PUROHIT VS. ITO JAIPUR. 6. THE LD. D/R SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES. 7. I HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE THE AO AND LD. CI T (A), IT EMERGES THAT IN RESPECT OF ASSESSEES CLAIM, THE RELEVANT DETAILS WERE BEFO RE THEM, WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED RELEVANT D ETAILS AND SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED IN TERMS OF SECTION 68, THE ADDITION IN QUESTION IS UNJUSTIFIED, WHICH IS HEREBY DELETED. 8. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/04/20 16. SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27/04/2016. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI VIKAS PUROHIT, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO WARD 7(3), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 811/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 5 ITA NO. 811/JP/2015 SHRI VIKAS PUROHIT VS. ITO JAIPUR.