SHRI Satish Neema, Indore V. THE ACIT 2(1), Indore

ITA 830/IND/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7151 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 14-10-2019
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 21-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S MANTRI
• Assessee Lawyers: ARPIT GAUR CAS
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Set aside; Capital Gains
• Section: 54F

Judgement Text

ITA NO.830 OF 2016 SATISH NEEMA 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.830/IND/2016 A.Y. 2011-12 SATISH NEEMA, INDORE PAN AABOPM 2352 F :: APPELLANT VS ACIT-2(1), INDORE :: RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI ANIL KAMAL GARG AND SHRI ARPIT GAUR, CAS REVENUE BY SHRI S.S. MANTRI, CIT DATE OF HEARING 14.10.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 15.10.2019 O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD. CIT(A)-I, INDORE, DATED 23.3.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADD ITION OF RS.18,21,583/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE APPELLANTS INCOME BY DENYING DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE APPELLAN T U/S 54F OF THE ACT. 2. FACTS, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THE DEPOSIT WAS IN THE CAPITAL GA INS ACCOUNT SCHEME. LD. CIT(A) ALSO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY DOCUMENTS THAT THE ACCOUNT IN ITA NO.830 OF 2016 SATISH NEEMA 2 WHICH THE MONEY WAS DEPOSITED WAS AN ACCOUNT OPENED UNDER THE CAPITAL GAINS ACCOUNT SCHEME. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS BE FORE US. 3. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 29 READ WITH RULE 18(4) OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE T RIBUNAL) RULES, 1963 STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE WISHES TO PLACE RELIANCE UPON CER TAIN ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE BEING THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BANKER IN RESPECT OF OPENING OF CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT. THE CERTIFICATE IS QUITE RELE VANT FOR ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE IN QUESTION AND THEREFORE, THE SAME MAY BE ADMITTED FO R HEARING. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELYING UPON RELEVANT JUDI CIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS PRAYED FOR ADMISSION OF THESE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AS THE SAME GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. SR. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE O RDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICATION FO R ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 29 READ WITH RULE 18(4) OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963 IN THE FORM OF THE CERTIFICAT E ISSUED BY THE BANKER IN RESPECT OF OPENING OF CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT. LOOKING TO THE FACT THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ADMIT THE APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. OUR VIEW IS F ORTIFIED WITH THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE CASES OF CIT VS. KUM. SATYA SETIA (1983) 143 ITR 486 (MP); CIT VS. GANI BHAI WAHAB BHAI (1998) 145 CTR 526 (MP) AND RAJMOTI INDU STRIES VS. ITO (1995) 52 ITD 286 (AHD.). THUS, TOTALITY OF FACTS CLEARLY SUGGEST S THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES REQUIRE DELIBERATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE LD. CIT(A) AS THE LD. CIT(A) HIMSELF NOTED IN ITA NO.830 OF 2016 SATISH NEEMA 3 THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROD UCE ANY DOCUMENTS THAT THE ACCOUNT IN WHICH THE MONEY WAS DEPOSITED WAS AN ACC OUNT OPENED UNDER THE CAPITAL GAINS ACCOUNT SCHEME. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDE RS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE SET ASIDE ON THIS ISSUE AND THE ISSUE IN MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHO WILL RECONSIDER THE RELEVANT DOCUMEN TS/SUBMISSIONS/JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN THE LIGHT OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDE NCES AFRESH. ASSESSEE WOULD APPEAR WITHOUT WAITING BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FU RTHER NECESSARY ACTION. THE LD. CIT(A) WOULD EXAMINE THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE FROM THE PAPERS FILED BEFORE US AND THEN PASS ORDER AFRESH IN TERMS AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE AFTER AFFORDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER L AW AND THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FURNISH THE EVIDENCE/SUBMISSION, IF ANY , IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM AND COOPERATE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. THU S, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. 5. FINALLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.10.201 9. SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- ( KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 15.10.2019 !VYAS! COPY TO: ASSESSEE/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR, INDORE