ITO, Ludhiana V. Sh. Shayamal Pal, Ludhiana

MA 67/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5775 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 01-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND SUDERSHAN
• Keywords: Revision of order; Audit objection; Peak credit; Tax effect; Set aside
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH , !' # $ % &' , '( BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 67/CHD/2018 ( ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 188/CHD/2017 DECIDED VIDE ORDER 04.07.2017) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 THE ITO, LUDHIANA VS. SH. SHAYAMAL PAL, LUDHIANA ./ PAN NO: ALSPP9635L APPELLANT / RESPONDENT / ASSESSEE BY : NONE ! / REVENUE BY : SH. ARVIND SUDERSHAN, SR.DR ' # $ / DATE OF HEARING : 03/01/2020 %&'( $ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03/01/2020 PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION DATED 22.11.2017 ARIS ING OUT OF ORDER DATED 04.07.2017 IN ITA NO. 188/CHD/2017 HAS BEEN MOVED BY THE DEPARTMENT FOR ASSESSMENT 2009-10 PLEADING FOR RECA LLING OF THE ORDER 4.7.2017 VIDE WHICH THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS D ISMISSED ON THE GROUND OF LOW TAX EFFECT. 2. IT HAS BEEN PLEADED IN THE APPLICATION THAT AS P ER AIR INFORMATION THERE WAS A CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 17,48,000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT THE AMOUNT OF C ASH DEPOSITS BELONGED TO M.A.NO. 67/CHD/2018 IN ITA NO. 188/CHD/2017- SHRI SHYAMAL PAL, LUDHIANA 2 HIS NEARS AND DEARS LIVING AND WORKING IN LUDHIANA WHO USED TO DEPOSIT THE MONEY IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS USED TO BE WITHDRAWN BY THE HIS BROTHER RESIDING IN HOOGLY AND WAS USE D TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE DEPOSITORS. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (CIT) INVOKING HIS REVISION JURISDICTION U/S 263 OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER HOLDING THAT THERE WAS NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE VERS ION OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER, THE MATTER WAS SET ASIDE TO THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER FOR ASSESSMENT AFRESH. IN THE FRESH ASSESSMENT, THE ENTIRE DEPOSIT OF RS. 17,48,000/- WERE HELD TO BE ASSESSORS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURC ES. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, TH E LD. CIT(A) RESTRICTED THE ADDITION TO THE PEAK BALANCE IN THE BANK ACCOUN T, AGAINST WHICH THE REVENUE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHICH WAS DISMISSED DUE TO LOW TAX EFFECT. 3. NOW THROUGH THIS MISC. APPLICATION, THE REVENUE HAS PLEADED THAT THE CASE FALLS WITHIN EXCEPTION (C) OF PARA 8 OF THE CB DTS CIRCULAR NO. 21/2015 DATED 10.12.2015 AS THE REVENUE AUDIT OBJE CTION IN THIS CASE WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS F ILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON SUCH GROUND. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAVE ALS O GONE THROUGH THE RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE AUDIT OBJECTION WAS RAISED IN THIS CASE AGAINST THE M.A.NO. 67/CHD/2018 IN ITA NO. 188/CHD/2017- SHRI SHYAMAL PAL, LUDHIANA 3 ORIGINAL ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 15.11 .2011. CONSIDERING THE AUDIT OBJECTION, THE LD. CIT EXERCISED HIS REVISION JURISDICTION U/S 263 OF THE ACT AND SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THEREAF TER, ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED AFRESH. HOWEVER, THE PRESENT M.A. IS NOT REL ATING TO ANY APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO THE REVISION ORDER PASSED U /S 263 OF THE ACT, RATHER, AFTER PASSING OF THE 263 ORDER BY THE CIT, THE ASSE SSING OFFICER PASSED A FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPE AL AGAINST THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) . THE LD. CIT(A) RESTRICTED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER TO THE EXTENT OF PEAK CREDIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT DURING THE YEAR, AGAINST WHICH THE REVENUE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL WHICH WAS DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 4.7.2017 ON THE GROUND OF LOW TAX EFFEC T. NEITHER THERE WAS ANY AUDIT OBJECTION IN RESPECT OF THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION TO THE PEAK CREDIT NOR THERE ANY GROUND RA ISED IN THE APPEAL RELATING TO THE ANY AUDIT OBJECTION. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE PRESENT M.A. OF THE DE PARTMENT HAS NO MERITS AND THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. IN THE RESULT, THE M.A FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS H EREBY DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.01.2020. SD/- SD/- ( # $ % &' / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) '( / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( / SANJAY GARG) / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 03.01.2020 M.A.NO. 67/CHD/2018 IN ITA NO. 188/CHD/2017- SHRI SHYAMAL PAL, LUDHIANA 4 ** &+,-.- / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ' / / CIT 4. ' / ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. -012 , $2 , 34516 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 157# / GUARD FILE &+ ' / BY ORDER, 8! / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR