I.T.O.-3(2), Mathura V. Sh. Ankur Garg, Mathura

ITSSA 8/AGR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0786 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 07-08-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K SEHGAL; UTSAV SEHGAL
• Assessee Lawyers: BELU SINHA
• Keywords: Loose papers

Judgement Text

I.T.(SS)A. NO.08 & CO 57/AGRA/2012 BLOCK PERIOD:01.04.96 TO 10.12.2002 PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE: SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A NO.08/AGRA/2012 BLOCK PERIOD: 01.04.1996 TO 10.12.2002 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, VS. SHRI ANKUR GARG, 3(2), MATHURA. 1921, NARSINGH NIWAS, DAMPIER NAGAR, MATHURA. [PAN : ABEPG 9352 J] C.O. NO. 57/AGRA/2012 (IN IT(SS)A NO.08/AGRA/2012) BLOCK PERIOD: 01.04.1996 TO 10.12.2002 SHRI ANKUR GARG, VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, 1921, NARSINGH NIWAS, 3(2), MATHURA. DAMPIER NAGAR, MATHURA. APPELLANT BY : SH. P.K. SEHGAL, ADV. & SH. UTSAV SEHGAL, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. BELU SINHA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 21.07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.07.2015 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS-OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 01.04.1996 TO 10.12.2 002, ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). THESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. IT(SS)A NO. 08/AGRA/2012 (BY THE REVENUE): 2. THE LEARNED DR AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT THER E IS A DELAY OF 20 DAYS IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL AND THE I.T.(SS)A. NO.08 & CO 57/AGRA/2012 BLOCK PERIOD:01.04.96 TO 10.12.2002 PAGE 2 OF 3 DELAY WAS DUE TO THE DEPARTMENTAL DIFFICULTIES. THE SAME MAY, THEREFORE, BE CONDONED. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED DR. ACCO RDINGLY, THE DELAY OF 20 DAYS IN FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL BY THE REVE NUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IS CONDONED. 3. THE ONLY GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS AS U NDER : 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.7,50,000/- MADE ON A CCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED CASH SALES, IGNORING THE EVIDENCE IN TH E FORM OF LOOSE PAPERS ANNEXURE-A. L.P. 6/30 AND REASONS AD VANCED BY THE A.O. FOR ABOVE ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF SUCH EVIDENCE. 4. THE LEARNED DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO . SHE REFERRED TO THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN SUPPORT OF THE CASE OF REVENUE. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED A WELL REASONED AND SPEA KING ORDER ON THE ISSUE. HE SUBMITTED THAT NO UNACCOUNTED CASH SA LES WERE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND EVEN IF IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE RE WAS SUCH SALE, ONLY THE PROFIT MARGIN THEREOF COULD BE ADDED IN TH E HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY MADE A SURRENDER OF RS.2,00,00 0/- AND THE SAME HAS BEEN ASSESSED BY THE DEPARTMENT, WHICH SHA LL COVER THE POSSIBLE PROFIT ON THE DISPUTED CASH SALES OF RS.7, 50,000/-. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND CIT(A). WE FIND THAT THERE IS F ORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT EVEN IF THE CASH SALES ISSUE IS PRESUMED TO BE AGAINST THE ASS ESSEE, THEN ALSO I.T.(SS)A. NO.08 & CO 57/AGRA/2012 BLOCK PERIOD:01.04.96 TO 10.12.2002 PAGE 3 OF 3 ONLY NET PROFIT RATE COULD BE APPLIED ON SUCH SALES AND THAT SHALL BE COVERED BY THE AMOUNT OF RS.2,00,000/- SURRENDERED ALREADY BY THE ASSESSEE AND HAS BEEN ASSESSED BY THE DEPARTMENT. W E FIND THAT THE AO IN THE COMPUTATION OF ASSESSABLE INCOME HAS ACCEPTED THE SURRENDER OF RS.2,00,000/-, WHICH WAS SURRENDERED B Y THE ASSESSEE IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME. IN THESE FACTS, WE HOLD TH AT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDI TION OF RS.7,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED CASH SALES AND THEREFORE, THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. C.O. NO. 57/AGRA/2012 (BY THE ASSESSEE): 6. IN VIEW OF OUR DECISION DISMISSING THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN THE FOREGOING PARAS OF THIS ORDER, WE HO LD THAT THE CROSS- OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT SURVIVE AND IS, ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE A ND CROSS- OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH JULY, 2015. SD/- SD/- INTURI RAMA RAO G.C. GUPTA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (VICE- PRESIDEN T) DATED: AGRA: 24 TH JULY, 2015 *AKS/- COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPOND ENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE(6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH, AGRA