Smt. Radha Sikchi, Indore V. ITO 2(2), Indore

ITA 912/Ind/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7764 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(2)

Judgement Text

ITANO.912/2019 SMT. RADHA SIKCHI 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE SMC BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.912/IND/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16 SMT. RADHA SIKCHI, INDORE / VS. ITO - 2 ( 2 ) INDORE ( APPELLANT ) ( REVENUE ) P.A. NO. AWGPS2260L APP ELLANT BY SHRI S.S. DESHPANDE, C.A. RE VENUE BY SHRI ASHISH PORWAL , SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 19.08.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21.08.2020 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER O F THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS [CIT(A)]-I, I NDORE DATED 05.08.2019 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 16. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITI ONS OF RS.5,60,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME BEING CASH DEPO SITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. ITANO.912/2019 SMT. RADHA SIKCHI 2 2. IT WAS PROVED BEFORE THE LD. AO AND THE LD. CIT( A) THAT THE CASH HAS BEEN DEPOSITED OUT OF HER INCOME AND S AVINGS. THE ADDITIONS OF RS.5,60,000/- MAY PLEASE BE DELETE D. 3. THE ASSESSEE CRAVES TO AMEND, ALTER OR DELETE AN Y OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND IS AGAINST CONFIRMATION O F ADDITION OF RS.5,60,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAIN ED INCOME BEING CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE FACTS GIVING RISE TO THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE THAT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT. ACCORDINGLY, A NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSU ED ON 27.07.2016 FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 08.08.2016 WHILE FRAMING ASSESSMENT ORDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERV ED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED TOTAL CASH AMOUNT OF RS.5,60,000/- ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS IN HER SAVING ACCOU NT NO.1327301047 OF CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, M.T. CLOTH MARKET, INDORE. IN RESPONSE TO THE QUERY OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE FILED HER EXPLANATION. IT WAS SUBM ITTED ITANO.912/2019 SMT. RADHA SIKCHI 3 BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A RE GULARLY ASSESSED TO TAX AND HAS BEEN KEEPING CASH IN HAND AND ALSO SOME AMOUNT WAS ADVANCED TO THE RELATIVES WHICH WERE REPAID TO HER. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DI D NOT ACCEPT THIS EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE AND MADE ADDITION OF RS.5,60,000/-. 4. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THIS THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A), WHO ALSO SUSTAINED THE ADDITION. 5. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITIO N AND SUSTAINING THE SAME. HE SUBMITTED THAT ALL REQUISITE EVIDENCES WERE PLACED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW REGARDING ASSESSEE BEING REGULARLY ASSESSED TO TAX. HE SUBMITTED THAT WHILE MAKING ASSESSMENT ADDITION IS MADE PURELY ON THE BASIS OF SURMISES. IT IS NOT THE CASE T HAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT HAVING SOURCE OF INCOME. SOURCE OF ITANO.912/2019 SMT. RADHA SIKCHI 4 INCOME WAS DULY EXPLAINED. HE HAS TAKEN ME THROUGH THE PROPRIETORS CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND OTHER EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE AO. THE LD. COUNSEL ALSO DREW MY ATTENTION TO BANK STATEMENT SUBMITTING THAT BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW W ERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION AND CONFIRMING THE S AME. 6. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR ) OPPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS AND SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 7. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE CO URSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE AO TH AT THE APPELLANT HAD MADE DEPOSIT AN AMOUNT OF RS.5,60,000/- IN HER BANK ACCOUNT HELD WITH CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA. THE AO HAD ASKED THE APPELLANT TO SUBMIT HER EXPLANATION IN RESPECT OF THE SAID CASH DEPOSIT. THE APPELLANT HAD FILED HER REPLY BEFORE T HE AO BUT THE AO WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE SAME AND HAD MADE THE ADDITION ACCORDINGLY. THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED IN HER WRITTEN REPLY THAT SHE WAS HAVING PAST ITANO.912/2019 SMT. RADHA SIKCHI 5 SAVINGS FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR. HER INCOME WAS BELO W TAXABLE LIMIT IN THE LAST 6YEARS. FURTHER, THE APPE LLANT HAS STATED THAT SHE HAD REGULARLY FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME. THE CASH DEPOSIT WAS MADE OUT OF HER PAST SAVINGS. THE APPELLANT HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT H ER PAST SAVINGS WERE KEPT IN FORM OF CASH OR MADE PETT Y ADVANCES TO HER RELATIVES. 3.2 IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE FACTS THAT THE APPEL LANT HAD FILED HER RETURN FROM THE LAST 6 YEARS AND SHE HAD MADE DEPOSIT OUT OF HER OLD SAVINGS. BUT IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT IF THE APPELLANT WAS HAVING SAVING ACCOUNT RIG HT FROM THE BEGINNING. I DO NOT FIND ANY REASON AS WHY SHE DID NOT DEPOSIT HER SAVING IN HER SAVING BANK ACCOU NT EARLIER. FURTHER, AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS, THE APPELLANT DID NOT FILE ANY SATISFACTORY EXPLANA TION BEFORE THE AO. HENCE, IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE FACTS, THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE AO IN HEREBY CONFIRMED AND ACCORDINGLY, THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. 8. FROM THE ABOVE OBSERVATION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IT IS CLEAR THAT HE ACCEPTED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING INCOME AND HAS BEEN ASSESSED TO TAX FOR MANY YEARS. HOWEVER, ADDITION IS CONFIRMED PURELY ON THE GROUND THAT DESPITE HAVING SAVING BANK ACCOUNT WHY ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT IN HER SAVING BANK ACCOUNT AND KEP T AMOUNT WITH HERSELF. IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW THIS REASO NING ITANO.912/2019 SMT. RADHA SIKCHI 6 OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE AD DITION. LOOKING TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS EVERY POSSIBILITY THAT ASSESSEE COULD BE KEEPING CASH WHICH CANNOT BE DOUBTED. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE, THEREFORE, I DIREC T THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THIS ADDITION. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 .08 .2020. SD/- (KU L BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER INDORE; DATED : 21/08/2020 PATEL/PS COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/GUAR D FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INDORE