Seikh Mohd. Tariq, Lucknow V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

MA 5/LKW/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4094 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: YOGESH AGARWAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO . 0 4 /LKW/201 6 [ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.653/LKW/2015] ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 12 - 13 MOHD. ZUBAI R SIDDIQUI, LUCKNOW V. DCIT, RANGE - 6, LUCKNOW M.A. NO.05/LKW/2016 [ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.654/LKW/2015] ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012 - 13 SHEIKH MOHD. TARIQ, LUCKNOW V. DCIT, RANGE - 6, LUCKNOW PAN ALGPS 8949 B (APP LIC ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP LIC ANT BY: SHRI YOGESH AGARWAL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI AMIT NIGAM , DR DATE OF HEARING: 04 0 3 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15 0 3 201 6 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THESE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE FILED AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE DATED 15.01 .2016 WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT THE TRIBUNAL INSTEAD OF ADJUDICATING THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN BANK ITSELF RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE NATU RE OF EXCESS DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ALL THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN THE BANK. 2. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS SUBMITTED THA T WHATEVER EXPLANATION RELATING TO SOURCES OF DEPOSITS IN BANKS BESIDES TH E AGRICULTURAL INCOME, WERE NOT :-2-: FURNISHED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE ASSESSE E HAS RAISED THE EXPLANATION FIRST TIME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, THE TRIB UNAL HAS RIGHTLY RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS REGARD. 3. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBU NAL VIS--VIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS WITH REGARD TO TOTAL DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF RS.6 9,26,600/- IN EACH CASE OUT OF WHICH CERTAIN DEPOSITS OUT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME W AS ACCEPTED BUT THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT WAS NOT EXPLAINED BEFORE THE LOWE R AUTHORITIES. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED CERTAIN EXPLANATIONS, BUT TH EY WERE NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE TRIBUN AL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION TH AT THE SOURCE OF THESE DEPOSITS BE EXAMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WHILE ISSUING TH E DIRECTION, THE TRIBUNAL HAS ACCEPTED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE AS SESSEE AT RS.24,70,800/- EACH IN BOTH THE CASES AND THE BALANCE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT WAS TO BE EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SINCE THE TR IBUNAL HAS GIVEN A PROPER DIRECTION IN THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, WE FIND NO JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. ACCORD INGLY, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS ARE DEVOID OF MERIT AND WE DISMISS THE SAME. 4. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTIONED PAGE. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 15 TH MARCH, 2016 AKS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPLICANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR