SMT. SUMAN SHAH, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 987/JPR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 98723114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDHARATH RANKA
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH : JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.987/JP/2011 ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 PAN:AFEPS7248K SMT. SUMAN SHAH VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR. WARD-4(2), JAIPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SIDHARATH RANKA, AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D.K. MEENA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 26/12/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:03.01.2012 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A), JAIPUR DATED 23.08.2011 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST SUSTAINING ADDITION OF RS.3,00,000/- MADE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT. 3. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO NOTICE D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS.3,00,000/- ON 12.04.2006. THE A SSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PROVE SOURCE OF THIS CASH. BALANCE SHEET OF EARLIER YEAR WAS FILED BY WHICH CASH BALANCE OF RS.3,65,735/- WAS SHOWN ON ACCOUNT OF CASH BALANCE. IT WAS FURTHE R EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD WITHDRAWN A SUM OF RS.2,30,000/- IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR FROM HER BANK ACCOUNT AND INCOME OF RS.94,218/- WAS SHOWN ON ACCO UNT OF PAINTING CLASSES. HOWEVER, THE AO WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF TH E ASSESSEE. HE NOTED THAT NO BALANCE SHEET WAS FILED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND THEREFORE, 2 CASH AVAILABILITY REMAINED UNVERIFIABLE. THE WITHDR AWAL FROM THE BANK IN EARLIER YEAR WAS ALSO NOT FOUND SATISFACTORY. THE AO ALSO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN INTEREST INCOME, THEREFORE, CASH AMOUNT WAS NOT GIVEN ON LOA NS OR INTEREST. ACCORDINGLY, HE REJECTED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED INCOME OF RS.3,00,000/- UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, FILED COPY OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). PART OF THE CIT(A) ORDER WAS READ ALSO. 6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, I FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO SUCCEED ON THE ISSUE INVOLVED. A COPY OF BALANCE SHEET AND RETURN FOR EARLIER YEAR I S PLACED ON RECORD AND IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ENCLOSED CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND BALANCE S HEET WHILE FILING THE RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 & 2006-07. COPY OF ACKNOWL EDGMENT RECEIPT (SARAL) PLACED AT PAGES 29 & 24 OF THE PAPER BOOK. COPY OF BALANCE SH EET IS ALSO PLACED ON RECORD AND AS PER COPY OF BALANCE SHEET FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 006-07, THE CASH IN HAND IS SHOWN AT RS.3,65,735/-. THE RETURN FOR EARLIER YEAR HAS BEEN ACCEPTED. THE CONTENTION OF THE AO THAT NO BALANCE SHEET WAS FILED ALONG WITH RETURN S EEMS TO BE INCORRECT, AS ON ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT, IT IS CLEARLY MENTIONED TH AT CAPITAL ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET WERE ENCLOSED. THE AO COULD HAVE EASILY VERIFIED TH IS FACT FROM HIS OWN RECORD. IT IS ALSO PROVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN RS.2,30,000/ - IN EARLIER YEAR FROM HER BANK ACCOUNT AND IT IS NOT INVESTED SOMEWHERE ELSE. THER EFORE, THE SAME WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. IT IS THE ASSESSEE WHO KNOWS AS TO WH Y SHE IS KEEPING CASH IN HAND WITH HER. THEREFORE, IN MY VIEW BONAFIDE OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE NOT BEEN DOUBTED WITHOUT ANY COGENT AND CORROBORATIVE MATERIAL. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS TAKEN ADVERSE VIEW 3 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILE ANY BALANCE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN THIS REGARD, IT IS SEEN THAT IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION AS PER IT SUB-RULE (2) OF RULE 12, THE ASSESSEES WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO ENCLOSE BALANCE SHEE T OR CAPITAL ACCOUNT ALONG WITH RETURN, IF THE RETURNS ARE FURNISHED IN FORM SAHAJ (ITR-1), OR FORM, NO. ITR-2 OR FORM NO. ITR-3 OR FORM SUGAM (ITR-4S) OR FORM NO. ITR-4 OR FORM NO. ITR-5 OR FORM NO.ITR-6. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHER HER RETURN IN FORM NO. ITR-4. THEREFORE, SHE WAS NOT OBLIGED TO FILE ANY BALANCE SHEET OR ANY OTHER DETAIL ALONGWITH RETURN FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THEREFORE, FOR THIS REASON , NO BALANCE SHEET WAS FILED. HOWEVER, DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS OR ASSESS MENT PROCEEDINGS, THEY WERE FILED WHICH ARE ON RECORD. DRAWING ANY ADVERSE INFERENCE WITHOUT ANY BASIS, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, I HOLD THAT THERE WA S SUFFICIENT CASH BALANCE FOR DEPOSITING RS.3,00,000/- ON 12.04.2006 IN HER BANK ACCOUNT. AC CORDINGLY, I TREAT CASH DEPOSITS AS EXPLAINED AND THEREFORE, ADDITION MADE AND SUSTAINE D IS DELETED. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.0 1.2012 SD/- ( R.K. GUPTA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 03 /01/2012 /SKR/ COPY FORWARDED TO :- THE ASSESSEE: SMT. SUMAN SHAH, JAIPUR. THE ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR. THE CIT (A), THE CIT, AJMER THE D/R, ITAT, JAIPUR. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 987/JP/2011 BY ORDER, 4