Sri Diwakar Akhilesh, Patna V. I.T.O., Patna

ITSSA 13/PAT/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4268 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 10 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 06-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A No.13/PAT/2014 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Shri Diwakar Akhilesh, Patna. (PAN: AKSPA0416C) Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward-4(2), Patna. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 16.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 20.05.2022 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Dhanbad, Camp office at Patna Appeal No. 356/CIT(A)-II/11-12 dated 13.03.2014 for A.Y. 2004-05 passed against the assessment order u/s 153A/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by ITO, Ward-4(2), Patna, dated 30.12.2011. 2. In the course of the present appeal none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We note that this appeal is of year 2014 and has been fixed several times for hearing but none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We have gone through the papers on record and find that the issue involved is in respect of addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) towards deposit of cash in the saving bank account of the assessee by treating Rs.2,79,108/- as unexplained money of the assessee. We find that there is a compilation placed in the appeal folder containing 26 pages and also a written submission by the assessee. Even though IT(SS)A No.13/PAT/2014 Diwakar Akhilesh A.Y. 2004-05 2 none appeared on behalf of the assessee and the matter being pending since 2014 which is almost eight (8) years old, we are inclined to adjudicate the matter with the assistance of Ld. CIT, DR Shri Sanjay Mukherjee who took all the pains in apprising the bench on the facts of the case and explaining the matter by reconciling them with the compilation and the written submission of the assessee on record. We thus, deal with the matter ex parte qua the assessee and appreciate the assistance given by the Ld. CIT, DR in disposing of this matter. 3. The brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation u/s. 132(1) of the Act was conducted in the case of the assessee on 16.02.2010 at the residential premises. The assessee filed the return in response to notice u/s. 153A of the Act returning a total income of Rs.75,000/-. In the course of assessment, Ld. AO noted that there are certain deposits in the two saving bank accounts of the assessee, one with State Bank of India, SPB Branch, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna and the other with United Bank of India, Branch Longertoli, Patna. Account with Union Bank of India is claimed to be a joint saving bank account along with father of the assessee Shri Vishnu Kant Pandey. The AO noted that there are several deposits in the two bank accounts for which he required the assessee to explain the sources of the said deposits. The assessee furnished explanation and stated that he was completing the course of engineering in United Kingdom (UK) during financial year 2003-04 relevant to Assessment year 2004-05 and he returned to India in the month of October, 2007 relevant to AY 2008-09. It was also submitted that before proceeding to UK the assessee was in India for a broken period of the year till August, 2003 during which he had earned an income of Rs.75,000/- from tuitions. The assessee has also availed an education loan during the year and the deposits in the saving bank included Rs.4,17,000/- towards disbursement of education loan availed by the assessee. The Ld. AO while making the assessment IT(SS)A No.13/PAT/2014 Diwakar Akhilesh A.Y. 2004-05 3 gave credit for the deposits towards education loan for the sum of Rs.4,70,000/- and also Rs.75,000/- in respect of income earned by the assessee from tuitions. After giving this credits, Ld. AO proceeded to make an addition of Rs.2,79,108/- as unexplained money of the assessee out of the total deposit of Rs.8,24,108/-. The Ld. AO held that assessee could not establish the genuineness of the balance amount of deposits of Rs.2,79,108/-. Aggrieved, the assessee went into appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). In the appellate proceedings, Ld. CIT(A) has tabulated the details of the deposits in the two saving bank accounts of the assessee and reproduced the submissions made by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) took an adverse view confirming the addition by holding that submissions of the assessee are not reliable and without any evidence. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The ld. CIT, DR assisted us in perusing the saving bank accounts of the assessee with the two banks and also the statement of bank account with Punjab National Bank which is the bank account of Shri Vishnu Kant Pandey, the father of the assessee. From the written submission of the assessee, it is noted that Shri Vishnu Kant Pandy, father of the assessee is a government employee since 1988. Upon reconciling the details of deposits tabulated by the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) in their respective orders with the two statements of saving bank accounts, it is observed that there are certain discrepancies about the cash deposits in the factual details captured by the authorities below. The correct state of facts in respect of the cash deposits made in the two bank accounts are re-tabulated hereunder to deal with the correct state of facts:- S. No. Name of the Bank Date Amount (Rs.) (A) State Bank of India IT(SS)A No.13/PAT/2014 Diwakar Akhilesh A.Y. 2004-05 4 1. 08.04.2003 10,000/- 2. 24.05.2003 10,000/- 3. 11.07.2003 20,000/- 4. 19.07.2003 20,000/- 5. 22.07.2003 15,000/- 6. 25.08.2003 25,000/- 7. 05.09.2003 1,000/- 8. 22.09.2003 75,000/- 9. 13.11.2003 40,000/- 10. 10.012004 12,000/- 11. 14.01.2004 7,500/- 12. 15.01.2004 5,000/- 13. 16.01.2004 1,000/- Total : A 2,41,500/- (B) United Bank of India 1. 05.08.2003 1,000/- 2. 12.01.2004 21,000/- 3. 07.02.2004 10,000/- 4. 07.02.2004 15,000/- 5. 12.03.2004 5,000/- 6. 25.03.2004 15,000/- Total B: 67,000.- Total: A + B = (Rs.2,41,500 + Rs.67,000) = Rs.3,08,500 5. From the re-tabulation of correct data of deposit of cash in the two saving bank accounts and from the details of withdrawal of cash recorded in the bank statements, we note that deposits in the State Bank of India from 08.04.2003 to 22.07.2003 amounting to Rs.75,000/- (sl. No. 1 to 5 of above table) the available cash from withdrawal is only of Rs.13,000/-. Thus, out of this Rs.75,000/- deposited in the bank account, the source for the remaining Rs.62,000/- cannot be substantiated from the material on record. We also note that in respect of deposits of Rs.25,000/- on 25.08.2003 and Rs.1000/- each on 05.09.2003 in State Bank of India and on 05.08.2003 in United Bank of India , there is nothing on record to explain the source of these deposits of Rs.27,000/- (Rs.25,000 + Rs.1000 + Rs.1000) (Sl. Nos.6,7 & B1). Further, in respect of deposit of IT(SS)A No.13/PAT/2014 Diwakar Akhilesh A.Y. 2004-05 5 Rs.75,000/- on 22.09.2003 (Sl. No. 8), Ld. AO has given a credit of Rs.75,000/- in respect of income reported by the AO in his return. Accordingly, the source for deposit of this Rs.75,000/- of cash stands explained. In respect of the remaining deposits of cash from 13.11.2003 to 16.01.2003 in State Bank of India (Sl. Nos. 9 to 13) and from 12.01.2004 to 25.03.2004 in United Bank of India (Sl. No.B2-6), we note that there are adequate withdrawals of cash from the accounts of the assessee himself and also from the saving bank accounts with Punjab National Bank, of the father of assessee, Shri Vishnu Kant Pandey. There is nothing on record to demonstrate and/or corroborate that these withdrawals of cash were utilized by the assessee or his father otherwise which explains that these withdrawals were available for deposit in the bank accounts explaining their sources. Accordingly, after considering the facts on record, the material furnished including bank statements and the explanations given by the assessee in written submission and the assistance provided by the Ld. CIT, DR, we find that deposit in cash of Rs.89,000/- (Rs.62,000 + Rs.27,000 dealt above) remained unexplained and are confirmed towards the addition made by the ld. AO. For the balance amount of Rs.1,90,108/- (Rs.2,79,108 – Rs.89,000), it is deleted for which the assessee gets the relief. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20.05.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (GIRISH AGRAWAL) VICE-PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated: 20.05.2022 JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: IT(SS)A No.13/PAT/2014 Diwakar Akhilesh A.Y. 2004-05 6 1. The Appellant: Shri Diwakar Akhilesh, S/o Dr. Vishnu Kant Pandey, Jeevan Jyoti Nurshing Home, Budha Colony, Patna-800001. 2. The Respondent: ITO, Ward-4(2), Patna 3. The CIT, Dhabbad 4. The CIT (A) Dhanbad 5. The DR, Patna Bench, Patna //True Copy// [ By Order Assistant Registrar/DDO ITAT, Patna Benches, Patna