Kavitha Devi Lahoti, Hyd, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-8(2), Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 957/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6321 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A SITHARAMA RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard; Deemed to accrue or arise in india; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 957/HYD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 KAVITHA DEVI LAHOTI, HYDERABAD. PAN AAOPL 8524 G VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 8(2), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI A.V. RAGHURAM REVENUE BY : SHRI A. SITHARAMA RAO DATE OF HEARING 04-08-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12-08-2016 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(A) - 2, HYDE RABAD, DATED 17 TH APRIL, 2015 FOR AY 2008-09. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE AN INDIVIDUAL, FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY 2 008-09 ON 31/07/2008 DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,68,300 /-. ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) BY MAKING ADDITIONS OF RS. 3,97,000/- AND RS. 11,13,772/-, AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS/DEPOSIT S U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 3. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL PERTAIN TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,97,000/- ONLY, AS THE OTHER ADDITION OF RS. 11,13,772/- MADE BY THE AO WAS DELETED BY THE CIT(A) WHEN THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED A PPEAL BEFORE 2 ITA NO. 957/H/15 KAVITHA DEVI LAHOTI HIM. THEREFORE, WE DEAL WITH THE ADDITION OF RS. 3 ,97,000/-, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT MATTER IN THE APPEAL. 4. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCHA RGED HER RESPONSIBILITY OF PROVING THE SOURCES AND CREDITWOR THINESS OF THOSE PERSONS FROM WHOM THE AMOUNTS SAID TO BE TAKEN AND, THEREFORE, TREATED THE SAME AS HER DEEMED INCOME AND MADE THE ADDITION AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENTS/DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK A CCOUNT U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 5. CIT(A) UPHELD THE ADDITION ON THE GROUND THAT TH E ASSESSEE FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE LIMBS OF SECTION 68 I.E. ID ENTITY, GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS EITHER AT ASSESSMENT STAGE OR IN THE APPELLATE STAGE. 6. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. BEFORE US, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ACCOUNT STATEMENTS WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF T HE PERSONS IS SUBMITTED IN THE PAPER BOOK FILED. HE SUBMITTED THA T THE CASH IS COLLECTED FROM THESE PERSONS AND DEPOSITED IN THE B ANK TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC OFFER. IF THE SHARE IS ALLOT TED THE SAME IS SOLD AND THE AMOUNTS ARE DISTRIBUTED. IF NO SHARES ARE A LLOTTED, THE AMOUNT IS REFUNDED BY DRAWING FROM BANK. ALL OF DEPOSITORS HAVE CONFIRMED THE ACCOUNT STATEMENTS. SOME OF THEM ARE IT ASSESSE ES AND COPIES OF THEIR PAN ARE SUBMITTED WITH ACCOUNT INFORMATION . LD. AR CONTENDED THAT ARRIVING THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,97,00 0/- BY THE AO IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS. HE HAS NOT EXPLAINED HOW THE AMO UNT IS ARRIVED EXCEPT STATING THAT HE HAS CONSIDERED THE CASH DEPO SITS AND GIVEN SET OFF FOR THE WITHDRAWALS. HE THEREFORE PRAYED THAT T HE SAID ADDITION MAY BE DELETED. 8., LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND RELIED ON THE ORDERS O F THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 3 ITA NO. 957/H/15 KAVITHA DEVI LAHOTI 9. CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES A ND PERUSED THE MATERIAL FACTS ON RECORD. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT T O MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, THE ISSUE MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF T HE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFTER EXAMINING THE EVIDENCES F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE M ATTER. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM BY W AY OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCES BEFORE THE AO. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND I S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 10. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATE D AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH AUGUST, 2016 SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (S. RIFAUR RAH MAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 12 TH AUGUST, 2016 KV COPY TO:- 1) SMT. KAVITHA DEVI LAHOTI, C/O K. VASANTKUMAR & A.V. RAGHURAM, P. VINOD, ADVOCATES, 610, 6 TH FLOOR, BABHUKHAN ESTATE, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD. 2) ITO, WARD 8(2), HYDERABAD. 3) CIT(A) - 2, HYDERABAD 4) PR. CIT - 2, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDE RABAD. 4 ITA NO. 957/H/15 KAVITHA DEVI LAHOTI S.NO. DESCRIPTION DATE INTLS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON SR.P.S./P.S 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR SR.P.S/PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S./PS SR.P.S./ P.S 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR. P.S./P.S. 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.P.S./P.S 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER