M/s Shri Adhinath Exports, New Delhi V. ITO, Noida

ITA 978/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4164 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURESH VERMA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI) (DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHHA, ACCOUNT MEMBER SHRI SHAMIM YAHHA, ACCOUNT MEMBER SHRI SHAMIM YAHHA, ACCOUNT MEMBER SHRI SHAMIM YAHHA, ACCOUNT MEMBER ITA NO.978/DEL./2011 ITA NO.978/DEL./2011 ITA NO.978/DEL./2011 ITA NO.978/DEL./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007- -- -08) 08) 08) 08) SHRI ADHINATH EXPORTS SHRI ADHINATH EXPORTS SHRI ADHINATH EXPORTS SHRI ADHINATH EXPORTS VS. VS. VS. VS. ITO, WARD 4, ITO, WARD 4, ITO, WARD 4, ITO, WARD 4, 72, 1 72, 1 72, 1 72, 1 ST STST ST F F F FLOOR, RISHAB VIHAR, LOOR, RISHAB VIHAR, LOOR, RISHAB VIHAR, LOOR, RISHAB VIHAR, NOIDA. NOIDA. NOIDA. NOIDA. DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI- -- -110092. 110092. 110092. 110092. (PAN/GIR NO. : ABFFS8493R) (PAN/GIR NO. : ABFFS8493R) (PAN/GIR NO. : ABFFS8493R) (PAN/GIR NO. : ABFFS8493R) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SURESH VERMA, CA ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SURESH VERMA, CA ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SURESH VERMA, CA ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SURESH VERMA, CA REVENUE BY : SMT. SURJANI MOHANTY, DR REVENUE BY : SMT. SURJANI MOHANTY, DR REVENUE BY : SMT. SURJANI MOHANTY, DR REVENUE BY : SMT. SURJANI MOHANTY, DR ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER A.D. JAIN: JM PER A.D. JAIN: JM PER A.D. JAIN: JM PER A.D. JAIN: JM THIS IS ASSESSEE'S APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 TAKI NG THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ERRED IN: A) ADDITION OF UNSECURED LOAN ALLEGED AS `19,29,879 UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S68 B) ADDITION OF CREDITORS AS ALLEGED `21,37,707 UNEXPLAINED CREDIT BALANCES OF CREDITORS (C) ADDITION OF CURRENT LIABILITIES ALLEGED `5,62, 285 UNEXPLAINED LIABILITIES -------------- TOTAL `46,30,285 2. SUBMISSIONS/DETAILS SUBMITTED TO THE CIT(A) NOT EVEN SEEN, EVEN ALL THE DETAILS ARE ALREADY ON RECORDS HE HAS TAK EN THE VIEW NO DETAILS/CLARIFICATIONS HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. I.T.A. NO.978/DEL./2011 (A.Y. : 2007-08) 2 2. AS PER GROUND NO.2, THE CIT(A), WHILE CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO HAS NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE SU BMISSIONS AND DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE CIT (A) FAILED TO CONSIDER THAT ALL THE DETAILS WERE ALREADY ON REC ORD. 4. LD.DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS PLACED STRONG RELIAN CE ON THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT HAS BEEN CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE , AS PER PARA 6.5 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, FURNISHED THE DETAILS AND SUBMISSIONS ONLY AT THE LAST MOMENT IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND T HAT IT WAS AS PER DUE TO ITS REASON THAT THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDIT IONS. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE MAT ERIAL ON RECORD. IN PARA 6.1 OF THE ORDER UNDER APPEAL, THE CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED, INTER ALIA, THAT THE REQUIRED DETAILS AND EVIDENCES W ERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO OR THE CIT(A). IN PARA 6.5, THE CIT( A) HAS OBSERVED, INTER ALIA, THAT THE DETAILS AND SUBMISSIONS WERE FURNISHED ON LY AT THE LAST MOMENT DURING HE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. HOWEVER, TH E CIT(A) HAS NOT TAKEN THESE DETAILS AND SUBMISSIONS INTO CONSIDERATION AND THE ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED, OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSE E DID NOT MAKE OUT ANY CASE AS TO WHAT PREVENTED HIM FROM FURNI SHING THESE DETAILS AND SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE AO. 6. IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS MAINTAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUFFERED HEAVY LOSSES IN T HE BUSINESS, IT BEING HIS FIRST BUSINESS; THAT THERE WAS A BANK LOAN OF `1.50 CRORES WHICH WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE BY SELLING ONLY HIS P ARENTAL HOUSE; THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO FEED HIS CHILDREN AND HAD TO ARRANGE A RENTAL PREMISES FOR HIS CHILDREN AFTER SELLIN G HIS PARENTAL HOUSE, WHICH WAS THE REASONS WHY IT COULD NOT FILE THE DETAILS BEFORE THE AO; THAT THE REQUISITE DETAILS WERE FURNISHED ALON G WITH SUBMISSIONS ON 26.11.10, INCLUDING ALL PURCHASE VOUCHERS, PAYMENTS OF DETAILS BY CROSSED PAYEE CHEQUES AND CONFIRMATIONS FROM PARTIES WITH I.T.A. NO.978/DEL./2011 (A.Y. : 2007-08) 3 PANS. THESE SUBMISSIONS ARE STATED TO HAVE BEEN FILED BEFO RE THE CIT(A) ALSO, WHICH FACT REMAINS UNCONTROVERTED. 7. THE ASSESSMENT, IT IS SEEN WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. THE SUBMISSIONS AND DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BE FORE THE CIT(A) WERE REJECTED AND THE ASSESSEE WAS THROWN OUT NEC K AND CROP WITHOUT CONSIDERING EVEN THE REASONS PUT FORWARD FOR T HE NON-FILING OF THE DETAILS BEFORE THE AO. 8. CONSIDERING THE REASONS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE, AS NOTE D HEREINABOVE, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTE D BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FORM FILING THE DETAILS BEFORE THE AO . THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS IN A SUMMARY MANNER WITHOUT C ONSIDERING THESE REASONS. IT IS TRITE LAW THAT NONE CAN BE CONDEM NED UNHEARD. THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE NEED TO BE CONSIDERED B EFORE MAKING/CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS. 9. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO T HE FILE OF THE AO, TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW ON PROVI DING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN ITS CASE AND CONSIDERI NG THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE, NO DOUBT, SHALL COOPER ATE WITH THE AO. 10. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29.04.2011. SD/- SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (A.D.JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DELHI, DATED : APRIL 29, 2011 SKB COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT, I.T.A. NO.978/DEL./2011 (A.Y. : 2007-08) 4 4.CIT(A)-XXI, NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR/ITAT