Shri Jaydeep Dhar, Hooghly V. ITO, Ward - 1(1), Hooghly, Hooghly

ITA 976/KOL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 62078 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K R MONDAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K B KUNDU
• Keywords: Source of fund
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148; 154

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: KOL KATA () BEFORE , /AND , . ! . '# ) [BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI C. D. RAO, AM ] $ $ $ $ / I.T.A NO. 976/KOL/2011 %& '( %& '( %& '( %& '(/ // / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 SHRI JOYDEEP DHAR VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-1 (1), HOOGHLY (PAN:AEHPD3967N) (*+ /APPELLANT ) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING: 18.04.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18.04.2012 FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI K. B. KUNDU FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI K. R. MONDAL '. / ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM ( , , , , ) THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF CIT(A)-XXXVI, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO. 379/CIT(A)-XXXVI/KOL/37/WD.1(1),HOOGHLY/08-09 D ATED 01.04.2011. ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY ITO, WARD-1(1), HOOGHLY U/S. 143(3)/147 O F THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003- 04 VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 28.11.2008. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS RAI SED BY WAY OF GROUND NOS. 1 TO 4 IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ADVANCED A LOAN OF RS.1 LAC TO SMT . ANNAPURNA NANDY FROM JOINT ACCOUNT OF FATHER AND SON, WHICH IS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED WIT HOUT ANY BASIS. FOR THIS, ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING FOUR GROUNDS: 1. THAT THE APPELLANT GAVE LOAN OF RS.1,00,000/- T O SMT. ANNAPURNA NANDY FROM THE JOINT A/C. OF FATHER & SON A/C. 1048570353 OF SBI, CHANDA NNAGORE, HOOGHLY WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY A.O. & CIT(A). 2. THAT THE APPELLANTS FATHER IS A PROFESSIONAL AC COUNTANT AND OLD ASSESSEE. HE OUT OF HIS OWN INCOME AND INCOME OF THE SON DEPOSITED RS.1,00 ,000/- IN THAT JOINT A/C THE SON ISSUED THE CHEQUE TO SMT. ANNAPURNA NANDY. THE SON IS A INSTRUMENTAL TECHNOLOGIST. 3. THAT THE SUM WAS DEPOSITED BY FATHER SRI BIJAN D HAR WHOSE ACCUMULATION AND DEPOSIT OF MONEY IS ACCEPTED BY CIT(A). SOURCES OF INCOME ELABORATELY EXPLAINED AND SHOWN IN FINAL A/CS. 4. THAT YOUR GOODSELF WOULD BE PLEASED IN ACCEPTING THE PETITIONER PRAYER FOR DELETING ADDITION AND/OR ANY OTHER RELIEF THAT YOUR LORDSHIP DEEM FIT. 2 ITA 976/K/2011 JOYDEEP DHAR A.Y. 03-04 3. BRIEF FACTS LEADING TO THE ABOVE ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 29.3.2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. SUBSEQU ENTLY, ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE ACT DATED 20.02.2008 AS PER INSTRUCTIONS OF CIT U/S. 264 OF THE ACT DATED 15.05.2006. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS, IN THE CASE OF SMT. ANNAPURNA NANDY FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04, THERE WAS MATERIAL THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ADVANCED A SUM OF RS. 100,000/- OUT OF DEPOSIT MADE IN CASH IN SBI, CHANDANNAGORE BRANCH ON 24.05.2002. SINCE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE D EPOSIT, ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF THE ABOVE SUM OF RS.1 LAC. IT IS TO BE MENTIONED TH AT NO APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED U/S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 28.1 1.2008 WAS FILED BEFORE CIT(A) THAT HAS BECOME FINAL. SUBSEQUENTLY, ASSESSEE MOVED RECTIFI CATION APPLICATION U/S. 154 OF THE ACT DATED 06.01.2009 WHEREBY HE HAS CHALLENGED THE ADDITION OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE RECTIFICATION PE TITION BY GIVING FOLLOWING FINDING: YOUR PRAYER WHICH WAS FILED ON 06.01.2009 FOR RECT IFY THE ORDER MADE U/S./ 143(3)/147 ON 28.11.2008 IS NOT ACCEPTED ON THE PLEA THAT ON GOIN G THROUGH THE ACCOUNTS FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATI ON, IT IS SEEN THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN LOAN OF RS. 1 LAKH TO SMT. ANNAPURNA NANDY, THE SOURCE O F WHICH YOU HAVE FAILED TO EXPLAIN AND ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON THE BAS IS OF YOUR ACCOUNTS. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A), WHO STATED THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WHATSOEVER IN THE ORDER OF ASS ESSING OFFICER PASSED U/S. 143(3) RWS 147 OF THE ACT DATED 28.11.2008 WHICH CAN BE RECTIFIED U/S. 154 OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, CIT(A)DISMISSED THE APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THROUGH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. WE FIND THAT EVEN NOW BEFORE US LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT POINT OUT ANYTHING WHICH LEADS TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE IS MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT. WE ARE O F THE VIEW THAT FOR THE ASSESSEE REMEDY LIES ELSEWHERE AND NOT IN RECTIFICATION PROCEEDINGS U/S. 154 OF THE ACT. HENCE, WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- . ! ! ! ! . '# , (C. D. RAO) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ( !# !# !# !#) )) ) DATED : 18TH APRIL, 2012 3 ITA 976/K/2011 JOYDEEP DHAR A.Y. 03-04 /0 %12 3 JD.(SR.P.S.) '. 4 ,5 6'5'7- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . *+ / APPELLANT SHRI JOYDEEP DHAR, RAMKRISHNA SARANI, BARASAT, CHANDANNAGORE, HOOGHLY, PIN 712136. 2 ,-*+ / RESPONDENT ITO, WARD-1(1), HOOGHLY. 3 . .% ( )/ THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. 5. .% / CIT KOLKATA 5=> ,% / DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA -5 ,/ TRUE COPY, '.%?/ BY ORDER, 2 /ASSTT. REGISTRAR .