Sh. Giriraj Singh Jindal, New Delhi V. DCIT, Faridabad

ITA 837/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0197 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 14-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K SAROHA
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI C BEN CH, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R ITA NO. 837/DEL/2017 [A.Y 2013-14] SHRI GIRIRAJ SINGH JINDAL VS. THE DY. C.I.T HOUSE NO. 535, SECTOR - 14 CENTRAL CIRCLE II FARIDABAD, HARYANA FARIDABAD PAN: AGUPJ 5254 B (APPLICANT) ( RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SOMIL AG ARWAL, ADV DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI A.K. SAROHA, CIT -DR DATE OF HEARING : 19.12.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.12.2019 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [APPEALS] KARNAL DATED 21.12.2016 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2 2. THE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCES OF THE ASSESSEE READ AS UNDER: 1. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) E RRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ALLOWING PART RELI EF TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1 LAKHS OUT OF TOTAL ADTIONAL MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF RS. 4,50,000/-U/S 69A OF THE A CT ON ACCOUNT OF CASH FOUND DURING THE SEARCH. 1.1 THAT IN ANY CASE AND IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER, ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 3,50,000/- IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT S EARCH WAS CONDUCTED AT THE RESIDENTIAL AS WELL AS BUSINESS PR EMISES OF M/S SRS GROUP ON 09.05.2012. AT THE TIME OF SEARCH OPERATI ON, AN AMOUNT OF RS. 16.01 LAKHS WAS FOUND FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PREM ISES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER PUT SPECIFIC QUES TION AND THE SAME IS AS UNDER: Q. 18ON PHYSICAL SEARCH OF THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES NO.535, SECTOR-14.FARIDABAD A TOTAL CASH AMOUNTING TO RS. I 6,L0.L00/-HAS BEEN FOUND. BRAKE UP OF WHICH IS AS UNDER: 3 (I) CASH FOUND FROM BEDROOM OF GOMATI DEVIJINDA L & G.S JINDAL RS. 4,71.900/- (II) CASH RECEIVED FROM SUNIL JINDAL &JINDAL BEDROO M RS. 6 , 33 , 000 /- (III) CASH RECEIVED FROM ANIL JINDAL & MRS. SH ASHI JINDAL BEDROOM RS. 3,83,900/- (IV) CASH RECEIVED FROM VINOD JINDAL & MRS.RITU JIN DAL BEDROOM RS.1,21,300/- PLEASE CONSULT ALL THE ABOVE FAMILY MEMBERS AND EXP LAIN THE SOURCES OF THIS CASH. ANS. WE WITHDRAW RS. 40,000/- EACH MEMBER(4 MEMBERS) PER MONTH FOR HOUSE HOLD EXPENSES AND THIS AMOUNT IS THE ACCUMULATION OF SAVING FROM HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. Q. 19 PLEASE GIVE ME THE BREAK UP OF MONTHLY EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY ALL YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS? RS. 7,500/- ON MILK RS. 10,000/- ON VEGETABLES RS. 15,000/- ON GROCERY RS. 5,000/- ON SERVANT SALARY RS, 15,000/- ON PETROL RS, 5,000/- ON MISCELLANEOUS EXP. 4 RS. 5,000/- ON MEDICINES RS. 10,000/- ON CLOTHES TOTAL RS.72,000/- +500/- I) Q.2 PLEASE PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT RESIDENCE? II) ARTS. RIGHT NOW, 1 DO NOT HAVE ANY EVIDENCE. I WILL PROVIDE LATER ON .. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ONCE AGAIN ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH IN HAND. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED DETAILS OF CASH OF EACH FAMI LY MEMBER AND THE SOURCE THEREOF AS UNDER: 5. NO NAME CASH FOUND IN SOURCE OF CASH AMOUNT DATED SUPPORTING 1 ANIL JINDAL 175.966 BANK WITH DRAWAL 200,000 20.04.1 2 COPY OF CASH STATEMENT/ BANK STATEMENT 2 SUNIL JINDAL 76.953 BANK WITH DRAWAL 100.000 20.04.12 COPY OF CASH STATEMENT-' BANK STATEMENT 5 3. VMOD JINDAL 93533 BANK WITH DRAWAL ...................... 100000 L ... ..... 20.04 12 COPY OF CASH STATEMENT / BANK STATEMENT 4. G.S JINDAL 176069 BANK WITH DRAWAL 1, 00,000 20.04.12 COPY OF CASH STATEMENTS BANK STATEMENT 5 _ . BANK WITH DRAWAL 200.000 29 02.12 COPY OF CASH STATEMENT/ BANK STATEMENT 6 SHASHI JIN DA! 79214 BANK WITH DRAWAL 200.000 29.02. 2 CAPY OF CASH STATEMENT- BANK STATEMENT 7 RILU JINDAL 220589 BANK WITH DRAWAL 1, 50,000 20.0412 COPY OF CASH STATEMENT - BANK STATEMENT BANK WITH DRAWAL 100000 29.02.12 COPY OF CASH STATEMENT/ BANK STATEMENT 7 SHALINI JINDAL 185498 BANK WITH DRAW AL 200,000 20.04.12 COPY OF CASH STATE MEND BANK STATEMENT 8. ANIL JINDAL (HUF) 169887 RENTAL INCOME 1,60.888 COPY OF CASH BOOK/ITR/ COMPUTATION OF INCOME 9 PRATEEK JINDAL 4000 SAVINGS 10 GOMITI DEVI 428391 SAVINGS 6 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND WAS OF THE OPINION THAT WHATEVER SUBMI SSIONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOTHING BUT AN AFTERTHOUGHT, AND CA NNOT BE ACCEPTED AND ACCORDINGLY, OUT OF TOTAL CASH OF RS. 4,71,900/ -, FOUND FROM THE BED ROOM OF SHRI G.S. JINDAL, ADDITION OF RS. 4,50, 000/- WAS MADE. 6. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. C IT(A) AND CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS 70 YEARS OLD AND HIS WIFE SMT. GOMATI DEVI IS 69 YEARS OLD AND MOST OF THE CASH BELONGED TO HIS WIFE WHO HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT RS. 4,28,391/- WAS STRIDHAN THA T ACCUMULATED OVER 20-25 YEARS. IT WAS FURTHER BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THERE WERE CASH WITHDRAWALS OF RS. 2 LAKHS ON 29.02 .2012 AND RS. 1 LAKH ON 20.04.2012 AND THE SAME COVERS CASH IN HAND . 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE TOTAL STRIDHAN OF THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE, AS CLAIMED, CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. HOWEVER, EXPLANATION WAS ACCEPTED TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1 LAKHS ON ACCOUNT OF STRIDHAN AN D ADDITION OF RS. 3,50,000/- WAS SUSTAINED. 7 8. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REIT ERATED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 9. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE FI NDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 10. WE HAVE GIVEN THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE O RDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE UNDISPUTED FACTS ARE THAT DU RING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS ITSELF, THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAIN ED THE BREAK-UP OF CASH IN THE NAME OF HIS FAMILY MEMBERS. SUCH BREAK -UP IS EXHIBITED ELSEWHERE. THE UNDISPUTED FACT IS THAT CASH WAS FO UND FROM THE BEDROOM OF THE APPELLANT AND, THEREFORE, IT CAN BE SAFELY PRESUMED THAT IT WAS IN JOINT POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE SMT. GOMATI DEVI. THE POSSESSION OF CASH AS STRIDHAN BY SMT. G OMATI DEVI CANNOT BE RULED OUT IN THE LIGHT OF THE CUSTOMS PREVAILING IN THE SOCIETY. 11. MOREOVER, THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY COMPLET ELY IGNORED THE FACT THAT THERE WERE CASH WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK S ON TWO OCCASIONS AMOUNTING TO RS. 3 LAKHS. ADDED TO THIS, STRIDHAN OF SMT. GOMATI DEVI AT RS. 4,28,391/- WOULD SUFFICE TO EXPLAIN THE CASH OF RS. 4,71,000/- CONSIDERING THE AFORE-STATED FACTS IN TOTALITY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT 8 IN THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE , ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED ADDITI ONS. 24. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I TA NO. 837/DEL/2017 IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.12. 2019. SD/- SD/- [SUSHMA CHOWLA ] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31 ST DECEMBER, 2019 VL/ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI 9 DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS /PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P S/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WE BSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER