Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2024] 139 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6738 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 month(s) 4 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
04-11-2024
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
B
Next Hearing Date
21-10-2024
Assessment Year
2018-2019
Appeal Filed On
30-09-2024
Judgement Text
"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “बी” , चǷीगढ़ \nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH \n \nHEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE \n \nŵी आकाश दीप जैन, उपाȯƗ एवं ŵी क\nृणवȶ सहाय, लेखा सद˟ \nBEFORE: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VP & SHRI. SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM \n \nआयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO.1017/Chd/2024 \n(Assessment Year: 2018-19) \n \nShri Tirloki Nath Singla \nSCO 80-81, 3rd Floor Sector 17-C \nChandigarh \nबनाम \n \nThe Asst. CIT \nCentral Circle-2, Chandigarh \n˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ABXPS6730K \nअपीलाथŎ/Appellant \n \nŮȑथŎ/Respondent \n \nStay Application No. 26/Chd/2024 \nIn \nआयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO.1017/Chd/2024 \n(Assessment Year: 2018-19) \n \nShri Tirloki Nath Singla \nSCO 80-81, 3rd Floor Sector 17-C \nChandigarh \nबनाम \n \nThe Asst. CIT \nCentral Circle-2, Chandigarh \n˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ABXPS6730K \nअपीलाथŎ/Appellant \n \nŮȑथŎ/Respondent \n \nिनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri T.N. Singla, C.A, \nराजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : \nSmt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR \n \nसुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21/10/2024 \nउदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 04/11/2024 \n \nआदेश/Order \n \nPER AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VP : \n \nThis is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-3, \nGurgaon dt. 27/09/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19. \n2. \nGround No. 1 is general in nature. \n3. \nApropos Ground Nos. 2 & 3, the AO made addition of Rs. 14,95,368/- on \naccount of investment made by the Assessee with the Punjab Sand Mining \nDepartment. The AO observed that the assessee had not disclosed these investments. \n\n2 \n \n4. \nIt was further held that the details of the investment had not been furnished by \nthe assese and that the assessee had failed to explain these transactions satisfactorily. \nIt was on this basis that the AO made addition under section 69 of the Income Tax \nAct, as unexplained investment. The ld. CIT(A) held that the assessee did not give \ncomplete details of correct entries in his HDFC Bank Account and that he also did not \ngive any cogent evidence to prove as to how the source of payment for the bidding \nprocess from their explained sources. \n5. \nAs before the ld. CIT(A), the assesssee has contended that he paid the amount \nof Rs. 14,95,368/- from explained sources as earnest money to participate in the \nbidding of sand mines in Punjab. The appellant also submitted that, the said tender for \ne-auction of mines was cancelled and the earnest money paid by prospective bidders \nwas refunded by the Mining Department in the same bank account and these \ntransactions are duly reflected in the bank account statement of the assessee submitted \nduring the assessment proceedings. \n6. \nThe ld. DR, on the other hand, placed strong reliance on the impugned order. It \nhas been contended that since the assessee had not filed complete details of the correct \nentries in his bank account with HDFC Bank Account, nor was he able to prove that \nthe payment for the bidding process had been made from explained source, the ld. \nCIT(A) has correctly confirmed the addition. \n7. \nIt has not been disputed that that before the authorities below, the assessee had \nprovided, as part of the statement of affairs, narration and source of each debit and \ncredit entries during the year, in his bank statement. \n8. \nThe bank account statement of the assessee is at APB-14 to 20. This bank \nstatement was furnished before the AO as well as the ld. CIT(A). However, the same \n\n3 \n \nhas not been discussed while making / confirming the addition. A perusal there of \nshows that it was the earnest money paid by prospective bidders, which was refunded \nby the Mining Department in that very bank account. Such transaction, undisputedly, \nstands reflected in the bank account statement of the assessee. It has not been taken \ninto consideration by either of the authorities below. It was the refunded amount \nwhich was again paid to the Mining Department when the occasion for bidding came \nabout / arose once again. \n9. \nIn view of the above, the grievance of the assessee by way of Ground Nos. 2 \nand 3 is found are justified it is accepted. The addition of Rs. 14,95,368/- is, \naccordingly hereby order to be deleted. \n10. \nIn the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. \n11. \nIn view of the aforesaid, where the matter has been decided in favour of the \nassessee, the stay application has become infructuous and the same is accordingly \ndismissed. \n \nOrder pronounced in the open Court on 04/11/2024 \n \n Sd/- \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n Sd/- \n क\nृणवȶ सहाय \n \n \n \n \n \n आकाश दीप जैन \n (KRINWANT SAHAY) \n \n \n \n \n \n (AAKASH DEEP JAIN) \nलेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपाȯƗ/VICE PRESIDENT\n \n \nAG \n \nआदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : \n \n1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant \n2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent \n3. आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT \n4. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) \n5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, चǷीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, \nCHANDIGARH \n6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File \n \nआदेशानुसार/ By order, \nसहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar \n"
Mehul