Sri Naveen Kumar Murarkar, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-2, Warangal

ITA 996/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 82471 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B RAMA KRISHNA
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Income from undisclosed sources

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M.JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.996/HYD/13 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL (PAN A IVPM 4139 R ) V/S. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, WARANGAL (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) AND ITA NO.1035/HYD/13 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, WARANGAL V/S. SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL (PAN - AIVPM 4139 R ) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : S HRI A.V.RAGHURAM DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI B.RAMAKRISHNA, DR DATE OF HEARING 15 . 1 0.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17 .10.2014 O R D E R PER P.M.JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THESE TWO APPEALS, ONE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, B E IN G I TA NO.996/HYD / 2013 , AND THE O T H E R FILED BY THE REVENUE, B EIN G ITA NO.1035/HYD/2013, ARE CROSS APP E ALS, WHICH ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE O R DER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) VI , HYDERABAD DATED 28.3.2013. 2. THE SOLITARY COMMON ISSUE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS REL A TES TO THE ADDITION OF RS .3,05,29,396 MADE BY THE ASSESSING I TA NO. 996 & 1035/H YD/20 13 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL 2 OFFICER ON ACCOUN T OF UN E XPL A IN E D DEPO S ITS FOUND TO B E MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE, W HI CH HAS BEEN SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) TO THE EXTENT OF RS ,.84,02,967 . 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS A N INDIVIDUAL , WHO IS ENGAGED IN TH E BU S IN E SS OF RUNNING A BAR AND RESTAURANT, IN THE NAME AN D STYLE OF HIS PROPRIETARY CONCERN, M/S. RUDRAKSHNI RESTAURANT AND BAR . THE RETURN OF IN C OM E FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FILED BY HIM ON 31.7.2009, DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS .3,83,646. DURING THE COU R SE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, I T WAS NO T ICE D BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE CHEQUE TRANSFER ENTR IES APPEARING IN THE BANK OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH SYNDICATE BANK, WARANGAL BRANCH, HA VE BEEN SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AS CASH WI T HDRAW A L S IN THE CASH BOOK. IN THIS REGARD, THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THER E WAS A MISTAKE ON THE P A RT OF THE AC C OUNT ANT IN MAKING THE RELEVANT EN T RI E S WAS NO T FOUND ACCEPTABLE BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER A ND THE AMOUNT OF SUCH ENTR IES SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AS CA S H WITHDRAWAL IN HI S CASH BOOK , AGGREG ATING TO R S .34,38,573 WAS ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE TOTAL INCOME O F TH E ASSESSEE, TR E ATIN G THE SAM E AS UNEXPLAIN E D CREDIT. 4. IT WAS ALSO NO T I C ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COU R SE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THAT SAVING BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH BANK OF IND IA AND CURRENT ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH CORPORATION BANK HAVE NOT B E EN REFLECTED IN THE BOOK S O F ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ENTRIES APPEARING IN THE SAID BANK A CCOUN T S INVOLV ING INTER - ALIA SEVERAL CASH DEPOSITS , ARE NO T REC ORDED IN TH E BOOK S O F ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. AS R E GARDS THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT M A IN T AINED WITH B ANK OF I NDIA, I T WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE T HAT THE SAME REPRESENTED HIS PERSONAL ACCOUNT AND SURPLUS CASH BALANCE OF THE BU S IN E SS WAS DEPOSITED THEREIN FR O M I TA NO. 996 & 1035/H YD/20 13 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL 3 TIME TO TIME. IT WAS ALSO EXPL A IN E D THAT THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO RUNNING ANOTHER RESTAURANT AND BAR IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF INDRAKEELA R E STAURANT AND BAR AT WARANGAL, AND THE SURPLUS CASH OF THE SAID BU S IN E SS WAS ALSO DEPO S ITED IN THE SAV IN G S BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH BANK OF I N D IA FROM TIME TO TIME . TH E STAND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT SIN C E THIS ACCOUNT WAS A P E RSONAL ACCOUNT, THE SAME WAS NO T REFLECTED IN THE BOOK S O F ACCOUNT M A IN T AIN E D BY HIM. THIS EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO NO T FOU N D ACCEPTABLE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND KEEPING IN VIEW THAT SUBSTANTIAL CASH DEPO S I T S WERE FOUND TO BE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN TH E SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WITH BANK O F INDIA ON VARIOUS DATES ON WHICH THERE WAS NO SUFFICIENT CASH BALANCE A S P E R THE BOOK S OF ACCOUNT, HE TREATED THE DEPOSITS FOUND TO B E MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF TH E ASSESSEE WITH BANK OF I N D IA AGGRE G ATIN G TO R S .68,65,019 AS THE UNACCOUNTED INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE . 5. AS REGARDS THE BANK AC C OUN T MAIN T AINED WITH CORPORATION BANK, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE SAID AC C OUNT WAS OPERATED TO DEPOSIT CASH GENERATED F R OM HIS BUSINESS AS WELL AS THE BUSINESS OF HIS WIFE IN ORDER TO OBTAIN DDS FOR PURCHASE OF LIQUOR FROM APBC LIMI TED AS NO CHAR G ES ON ISSUE OF P AY O RDERS FACILITY WAS GIVEN TO HIM BY CORPORATION BANK. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT DEPOSITS MADE IN THE SAID ACCOUNT THUS WERE F ROM THE BU S IN E SS ES OF HIMSELF AS WELL AS HIS WIFE. THIS EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AGAIN WAS N O T FOUND ACCEPTABLE BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER KEEPING IN VIEW THAT NON E O F THE CASH DEPO S ITS MADE IN TH E C ORPORATION BANK WAS FOUND TO BE EMANATED F R OM THE BOOKS O F ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. HE , THER E FORE, TR E ATED THE ENTIRE CREDITS APP EA RING IN TH E SAID ACCOUNT, AGGRE G ATING TO RS .2,02,25,804 AS U NEXPLAIN E D CR E DIT AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE TO T AL INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE. I TA NO. 996 & 1035/H YD/20 13 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL 4 6. AC C OR D INGLY, TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.3,05,29,396 WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE TOTAL INCOME O F THE ASSESSEE ON ACCO UNT OF UN E XPL A IN ED DEPO S ITS / CREDITS APPEARING IN ALL THE THREE BANK AC C OUN TS MAINTAINED BY HIM, IN THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UN D ER S.143(3 ) VIDE ORDER DATED 30.12.2011. 7. AGAIN S T THE ORDER PASS ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UN D ER S.143(3), AN APP E AL W AS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), DISPUTING THE ADDITIONS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UN E XPLAINED DEPOSITS/CREDITS IN HIS BANK ACCOUN T S. DURIN G THE COU R SE OF APP E LL A TE PROCEE D INGS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE ASSESSING O FFICER WERE REITERATED BY THE ASSESSEE STATING THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE NO T P R OP E RLY MAIN T AINED BY THE ACCOUNTANT, AND THER EF OR E , ALL THE DEP O SITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS FROM TIME TO TIME GENERATED FROM HIS BUSINESS AS WELL AS HIS WIFES BUSINESS COULD NO T BE PROPERLY CORRELATED OR EXPLAINED. TH E ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMI T TED BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) THAT HE HAS PREPARE D A CORRECTED CASH BOOK AND LEDGER AND SOU G H T PERM IS SION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) TO PRODUCE THE SAME FOR VERIFICATION. THE LEARNED CIT(A) GRANTED PERMISSION TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE FRESH CASH BOOK AND LEDGER PREPARED BY HIM INCORPORATING THE ENTRIES RELATING TO ALL TH E THREE BANK AC C OUN T S AND FORWARDED THE SAME TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS VE RIFICATION AND COMMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCORDINGLY VERIFIED THE CASH BOOK AND THE LEDGER PREPARED BY TH E ASSESSEE AND SUBMI TT ED HIS REMAND REPORT, OFFERING HIS COMMENTS AFTER SUCH VERIFICATION. IN TH E SAID REMAND REPORT, HE SUM M ARISED THE RELEVANT TRANS A CTION S IN TH E CASH BOOK INCORPORATING ALL TH E THREE BANK ACCOUN T S AS UNDER - I TA NO. 996 & 1035/H YD/20 13 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL 5 SL. NO. NAME OF THE BANK RECEIPTS WHICH ARE UTILIZED IN THE BUSINESS CONCERN (IN RS.) PAYMENTS TOWARDS THE PURCHASES OF DDS FROM APBC LTD. (IN RS.) (+)/( - ) BALANCE (IN RS.) 1. SYNDICATE BANK 35,03,586 1,00,08,607 ( - ) 65,05,021 2. BANK OF INDIA 66,22,500 60,29,000 5,93,500 3. CORPORATION BANK 27,.66,500 1,42,58,625 ( - )1,14,92,125 TOTAL 1,28,92,586 3,02,96,232 ( - )1,79,97,146 8. O N TH E BASIS O F THE ABOVE SUMMARY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER STATED IN TH E REMAND REPORT THAT THE AMOUNTS OF RS.1, 1 4,92,125 AND RS.65, 05, 021 APP E ARING IN THE BANK AC C OUN T S OF THE ASSESSEE WITH CORPORATION B ANK AND SYNDICATE BANK RESPECTIVELY REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AND THE SAME DE SE RVE D TO B E CON S I D ERED FOR MAKING ADDITION TO THE TOTAL INCOME O F TH E ASSESSEE . HE ALSO STATED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.63,4 7 , 0 66, REPRESE NT ING PURCHASES/DDS OF THE BU S IN E SS OF THE WIFE OF TH E ASSESSEE CARRIED ON IN TH E NAME AND S TYLE OF I NDRAKEELA BAR AND R E STAURANT MAY NO T B E CON S IDERED FOR MAKING ADDITION AND ONLY THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF R S .1, 1 6, 49,680 SHOULD B E CONSIDERED FOR MAKING ADDITION TO THE TOTAL IN C OM E O F TH E ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF UN E XPLAIN E D CREDITS. 9. WHEN TH E RE MAN D REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS CONFRONTED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) TO THE ASSESSEE, THE LATTER OFFERED HIS COUNTER COMMENTS BY POINTING OUT THAT THE ACTUAL AMOUNT RECEIVED F R OM INDRAKEELA BAR FOR PU R CH A SE OF DDS AMOUNTED TO R S .78,04,265 AND NO T RS.63 ,46,06 6 AS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LEARNED CIT(A) VERIFIED THIS PO S IT I ON F R OM THE ACCOUNT COPY OF THE I N DRAKEELA BAR IN TH E BOOKS OF ACCOUN T O F THE ASSESSEE, AN D ACCORDINGLY REDUCED THE UNEXPLAINED CREDIT WORKED OUT BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER AT RS.1,16, 49,680 TO RS.1, 01,82,881 . I TA NO. 996 & 1035/H YD/20 13 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL 6 10. ANOTHER POINT RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE B E FORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) BY WAY OF COUN T ER - COMMENT ON THE REMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS .80,50,000 R EPRESENTED THE DD PURCHASED AGAINST THE CH E QUES ISSUED FROM CORPORATION BANK AND SYN D ICATE B ANK. IN THIS REGARD, THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOUND THAT THE AMOUNTS OF R S.35,03, 586 AND RS.26, 27,66,500 UTILI S ED BY TH E ASSESSEE FORM SYNDICATE BANK AND CORPORATION BA N K WERE ALREADY T AKEN IN TO CON S I D E R ATION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO WORK OUT THE AD D ITION OF R S .1,16,49,680 ON ACCOUNT OF UN EXP LAINED CR E DITS IN TH E REM A ND REPORT. HE , THEREFORE, ACCEPTED THE S T AND OF THE ASSESSEE ON THI S ASPECT ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF THE BALANCE AMOUN T OF RS .17,79,914 AND HELD THAT THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDITS/DEPO S I TS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO B E MADE TO THE EXTENT OF R S .84, 02,967 . ACCO R D I NGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS.3,05,29,396 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER O N THIS ISSUE WAS RESTRI CT ED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) TO RS.84,02,967. 11. AGGRI E VED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), BOTH TH E REVENUE AND THE ASSESSEE HAVE PREFERRED THE SE APPEALS BEFORE THE TR I BUNAL, ON THE FOLLOWING G R OUNDS - GROUNDS IN ASSESSEES APPEAL: 1 . ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) VI, HYDERABAD ALLOWING THE APPEAL ONLY IN PAT IS ERRONEOUS, PREJUDICIAL TO THE APPELLANT AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW. THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) O UGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED THE APPEAL IN ENTIRETY AND SHOULD HAVE DELETED THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS.3,10,36,500 I TA NO. 996 & 1035/H YD/20 13 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL 7 2 . THE CIT(A) ERRED INS SUSTAINING THE ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.84,02,967. 3 . HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT THAT AS SESSING OFFICER HAD ONLY CONSIDERED THE AMOUNTS UTILIZED FOR PURCHASE OF DEMAND DRAFTS FOR PAYMENT TO APCBL, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE OTHER AMOUNT WHICH GOT DEPOSITED INTO THE RESPECTIVE BANK ACCOUNTS, AND THE SAME OUGHT NOT TO HAVE BEEN TR EATED AS UNEXPLAINED CREDITS. GROUNDS IN REVENUES APPEAL: 1 . THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 2 . IN THE ABSENCE OF ROPER EXPLANATIONS REGARDING THE AMOUNTS OF RS.1,14,92,125/ - AND RS.65,05,021/ - , THE CIT(A) - VI, HYDERABAD OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THESE ADDITIONS AS SUGGESTED BY THE A.O DURING THE REMAND REPORT PROCEEDINGS. 3 . ANY OTHER GROUND HAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 12. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. W E HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE FINAL CORRECTED CASH BOOK PREPARED AND FURNI S HED BY THE ASSESSEE PL A CED AT P A GE NOS.29 TO 52 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER - BOOK ALONGWITH THE SUMM A RISED DAILY CASH FLOW PLACED AT PAGE NOS.53 TO 59 OF THE PAPER - B OOK, AND T HE COPY O F THE REMAND REPORT SUBMI T TED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE LEARNED CIT(A) PLACED AT P AG E NOS.24 TO 28 OF THE PAPER - BOOK. IT IS OB S ERVED THAT A I TA NO. 996 & 1035/H YD/20 13 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL 8 SUMMARY OF TRANSACTION S APPEARING IN THE CASH BOOK O F THE ASSESSEE IN C ORPO R ATIN G ALL THE T RAN S ACTION S REFLECTED IN THE THREE BANK ACCOUNTS WAS PREPARED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE SAME WAS ANNEXED TO THE REMAND REPORT. I N TH E SAID SUMMARY, RECEIPTS APPEARING IN SYN D ICATE BANK, BANK OF I NDIA AND THE CORPORATION BANK WHICH WERE U TILI S ED IN THE BU S IN E SS CONCERN, WERE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS. 3 5,0 3,586, RS.26,22,500 AND R S .27,66,500 AND THE PAYM E N T S MADE FROM TH E SE THREE BANK AC C OUN T S F O R PURCHASE OF DDS FO R ABPBCL WERE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS.1,0 0 , 08, 60 7, R S . 60,29,000 AND RS .1,42,58,625 RE S P E CTIVELY, AND TH E DIFFERENCE WAS CONSIDERED BY HIM AS UNEX P LAIN E D CREDIT S APP E ARING IN TH E CON C ERNED BANK ACCOUNTS. A PERUSAL OF THE SUMMARY OF DAY - WISE TRANSACTION S PREPARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND PL A CED AT PAGE NOS.53 TO 59 OF THE PAPER BOOK HOWEVER, SHOWS THAT THE AMOUNTS OF RS .35,03,586 RS .66, 22, 500 AND RS. 27,66, 500 ACTUALLY REPR E SENT ED WITHDRAWALS MADE BY TH E A SSESSEE IN C A SH FROM TH E BANK AC C OUN TS M A IN T AIN E D WITH SYN D ICATE BANK, BANK OF I NDIA AND COR P ORATION BANK RESPECTIVELY AND NO T TH E RECEIPTS UTILI S ED BY TH E ASSESSEE IN HI S BUSI N ESS, AS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SIMILARLY, THE AMOUNTS OF RS.1, 00, 08,607, RS.60, 29,000 AND RS .1,42,50,625 REPR E SEN T ED CASH DEPO S ITS MADE BY TH E ASSESSEE IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS MAI NTAINED WITH SYN D I C ATE BANK, BANK OF I NDIA AND CORPORATION BANK RESPECTIVELY AND NO T THE PAYM E N T S MADE FOR PURCH A SE OF DDS IN FA V OU R OF APBC LIMI T ED AS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT IS TH US CL E AR THAT THE VERY BASIS ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) TO QUAN T I F Y THE UN E XPLAIN E D CREDITS IN T H E BANK AC C OUN T S OF THE ASSESSEE I S WRON G AND THE AMOUNT OF SUCH UNEXPLAIN E D CREDIT S WORKED OUT BY THEM FOR MAKING ADDITION TO THE TOTAL INCOME O F TH E ASSESSEE, CANNOT B E TAKEN AS CORRECT. I N OUR OPINION, THE EXACT AMOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CREDI T S APPE A RING IN TH E BANK AC C OUN T S OF TH E ASSESSEE NEED S TO BE WORKED OUT BY I TA NO. 996 & 1035/H YD/20 13 SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, WARANGAL 9 ASCERTAINING THE AVAILABILITY O F CASH WITH TH E ASSESSEE AS PER THE CASH BOOK FOR MAKING THE CASH DEPOSITS I N BANK AS AND WHEN MADE AND I T CAN PROPERLY BE DONE BY VERIFYING EACH AND EVERY CASH DEP O SIT FOUND TO B E MADE IN THE BANK AC C OUN T S OF THE ASSESSEE W ITH REFERENCE TO THE CORRESPONDING AVAILABILITY O F CASH AS PER THE CASH BOOK . SIN C E THIS EXER C I S E HAS NO T B E EN DONE PROPERLY EITHER BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR BY THE LEARNED CIT(A), AND THE AMOUNT O F UN E XPLAIN E D CREDIT S HAS BEEN WORKED OUT BY THEM ON A PATENTLY WRONG BASIS, WE SET A S IDE THE IMPU G N E D ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A) AND R E STORE T HE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER ASCERTAINING THE EXACT AMOUNT OF UN E XPLAIN E D CREDITS AP PE ARING IN TH E BANK AC C OUN T S OF THE ASSESSEE BY DOING A PROPER EXERCISE. NEEDLESS TO OBSERVE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL AFFOR D SUFFIC I ENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD ON THIS ISSUE. 13. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE REVENUE ARE TREATED AS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. \ ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 17 TH OCTOBER, 2014 SD/ - SD/ - ( SAKTIJIT DEY ) ( P.M.JAGTAP ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT/ - 17 TH OCTOBER, 2014 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR MURARKAR, (WARANGAL) C/O. SHRI K.VASANT KUMAR, ADVOCATE,610, BABUKHAN ESTATE, BASHEER BAGH, HYDERABAD 1. 2 . INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 , WARANGAL 3. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) V I , HYDERABAD COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX V , HYDERABAD 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S