Shri Sunill Kumar Gupta,Prop.Swarna Kala Mandir, Allahabad V. Income Tax Officer, Allahabad

ITA 99/ALLD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5850 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-07-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 05-07-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GARIMA CHAUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: DR N C AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 131; 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH: ALLAHABAD (BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. NO. 99/A/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SUNIL KUMAR GUPTA, -V/S.- THE INCOME TAX O FFICER PROP. SWARNA KALA MANDIR, RANGE-II(3), 67, MEERGANJ, ALLAHABAD. ALLAHABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : DR. N.C. AGRAWAL, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : MISS GARIMA CHAUDHARY, DCIT, DR O R D E R PER B.P. JAIN THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES FROM THE ORDER O F LD. CIT(A), ALLAHABAD DATED 17/03/2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. BECAUSE THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACT S IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.67,000/- UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE ACT. 2. BECAUSE IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, NO ADDITION FOR UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT U/S 69 OF T HE ACT IS LIABLE TO BE MADE. 3. BECAUSE THE CONFIRMATION DONE FOR THE ADDITION M ADE U/S 69 AT RS. 67,000/- IS EXCESSIVE. 4. BECAUSE THE ORDER APPELLED AGAINST IS CONTRARY T O LAW, FACTS AND PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. --2-- 3. THE BRIEF FACTS IN ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT U/S 69 OF THE ACT WHICH WERE ADDED OF THE I NCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF GOLD AND SILVER ORNAMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CERTAIN DEPOSITS IN SAVING BANK A CCOUNT IN VIJAYA BANK WHICH ARE CASH DEPOSIT ON DIFFERENT DATES AS PER DETAILS AVAILABLE ON PAGE 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASS ESSEE WAS NOT FOUND SATISFACTORY AND THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS.33500 /- AND RS.33500/- TOTALING TO RS.67000/- WAS MADE TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE A.O. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE EXPLANATION THAT HE HAS RECEIVED A LOAN OF RS.18000/- FROM ONE SHRI ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA WHOSE CONFIRMATION WAS SUBMITTED VIDE LETTER AVAILA BLE AT PB-22. THE CASH IN HAND WAS AVAILABLE ON THE DATE OF INVESTMENT WAS FU LLY EXPLAINED AND IS EVIDENT FROM THE SUMMARY OF CASH AVAILABLE AT PB-29, 30 AND 31. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ACTIO N OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THE SOURCES OF THE INVESTMENT BEFORE BOTH THE AUTHORITIES INCLUDING TH E CONFIRMATION FROM SHRI ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA. NO DEFECT IN THE SAME HAS BEEN P OINTED OUT BY ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. MOREOVER, THE A.O. WAS COMPETEN T TO ISSUE NOTICE U/S 131 TO --3-- MR. ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE LOAN RAISED BUT THE SAME WAS NOT DONE. THEREFORE, IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE CASE THE A.O. IS NOT JUSTIFIED TO REJECT THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO BE REVERSED. 7. THUS GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOW ED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NO. 99/A/2011 IS ALLOWED. 9. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05. 07.2011. SD/- (B.P. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE:- 05.07.2011 COPY TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. A.O. 5. DR, ITAT, ALLD. BY ORDER (A.S.) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR