DCIT, Central Circle,, Tirupathi v. A. Muni Krishnaiah, Tirupathi

CO 57/HYD/2011 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 5722523 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AEMPA4295B
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number CO 57/HYD/2011
Duration Of Justice 22 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, Central Circle,, Tirupathi
Respondent A. Muni Krishnaiah, Tirupathi
Appeal Type Cross Objection
Pronouncement Date 29-09-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 29-09-2011
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 07-09-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYA RAGHAVAN JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1123/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 005-06 THE DCIT TIRUPATHI VS SHRI A. MUNIKRISHNAIAH TIRUPATHI (PAN AEMPA 4295 B) APPELLANT RESPONDENT CO.57/HYD/2011 IN ITA NO.1123/HYD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 005-06 SHRI A. MUNIKRISHNAIAH TIRUPATHI (PAN AEMPA 4295 B) VS THE DCIT TIRUPATHI APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI V. SRINIVAS RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PHALGUNA KUMAR DATE OF HEARING : 15.9.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.9.2011 ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI A.M. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) VII HYDERABAD DATED 28 .3.2011 AND PERTAINS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. THE FIRST GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.8 34 655/- WITH REGARD TO UNEXPLAINE D INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF PLOTS WITHOUT ACCEPTING T HE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO WITHOU T GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE THOUGH THE ADDITI ON IS BASED ON THE SEIZED MATERIALS. 2 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE AN ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF SEIZED MATERIA L A/AM/R/4/ PAGE 42 TO 45 AND 109 AND PAID 1-2 OF ANNEXURE 3 CONTAINING TWO REGISTERED SALE DEEDS AND TWO SIMPLE MORTGAGE DEEDS. THE TOTAL INVESTMENT THERET O IS RS.5 17 560/-. 3.1. AS PER ANNEXURE A/AMS/R/01 PAGE NO.42 TO 55 THERE IS SALE DEED BEARING NO.5657 OF 2004 DATED 4. 8.2004 DATED 4.8.2004 FOR PURCHASE OF HOUSE BEARING NO.18- 1-800. THE TOTAL INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF PROPERTY INCLUD ING STAMP DUTY AND REGISTRATION CHARGES IS RS.1 77 165/ - 3.2. AS PER ANNEXURE A/AMS/R/01 PAGE NO.98 TO 109 THERE IS SALE DEED BEARING NO.9181 OF 2004 DATED 20.12.2004 FOR PURCHASE OF TWO PLOTS BEARING NOS. 7 0 AND 71 IN SECOND VENTURES OF SWARNA BUILDERS AND CONSUL TANTS AT VEDANTAPURAM. THE TOTAL INVESTMENT INCLUDING ST AMP DUTY AND REGISTRATION CHARGES IS RS.1 39 390/-. 4. ON APPEAL IN RESPECT OF ADDITION OF RS.5 17 5 16/- WHICH IS PART OF ADDITION OF RS.8 34 655/- IT IS SU BMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAD MADE AN INVESTMENT IN A HOUSE SITE ON 20 TH DECEMBER 2004 AT RS.1 40 085 WHICH HAS BEEN DISCLOSED IN ASS ESSEES STATEMENT OF AFFAIRS AS ON 31.3.2005. SIMILARLY AS SESSEE ALSO HAD MADE AN INVESTMENT IN A HOUSE AT RAILWAY C OLONY TIRUPATHI ON 4.8.2004 AT RS.1 76 705/- WAS ALSO DIS CLOSED WHILE FILING THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME AS ON 31 .3.2005 WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. THE ASS ESSEE ALSO HAD DISCLOSED SUNDRY DEBTORS AT RS.2 00 000/- 3 (RS.1 00 000 + 1 00 000) FOR WHICH MORTGAGE DEEDS A RE THE EVIDENCES WHICH WERE SEIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND T HE SAID DEBTORS OF RS.2 LAKHS HAVE BEEN ALSO DISCLOSED AS ON 31.3.2005. THEREFORE THE TOTAL SUM OF RS.5 16 790 /- HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE WHILE FILING THE ORI GINAL RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND TH E ASSESSING OFFICER RELIED UPON THE SEIZED MATERIAL A ND HE IS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD UNACCOUNTED INVES TMENTS OF RS.5 16 790/- WITH REGISTRATION CHARGES AND STAM P DUTY OF RS.770/- WHICH COMES TO RS.5 17 560/-. THE ASSE SSING OFFICER DID NOT MAKE ANY COMPARISON WITH RETURN OF INCOME FILED WHEREIN THESE INVESTMENTS ARE VERY MUCH DISCL OSED AND WHICH HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT WHEN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED. THEREFORE TH E ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD NOT HAVE MADE THE ABOVE AD DITIONS SINCE THEY ARE VERY MUCH DISCLOSED IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME AND THE DEPARTMENT HAS ACCEPTED THE SAID INVESTMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER HAS NOT FOUND OUT ANYTHING AGAINST THE SAID INVESTM ENT MADE SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DISCLOSING SUFFICI ENT INCOME AND ASSESSEE ALSO HAD SUFFICIENT OPENING CAP ITAL ACCOUNT BALANCE FOR MAKING ABOVE INVESTMENTS. THER EFORE IT IS PLEADED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS GOT SUFFICIENT SOURCE FOR MAK ING THE INVESTMENT OF RS.5 17 560/- IN TWO IMMOVABLE PROPER TIES AS DISCUSSED ABOVE AND GIVING ADVANCES TO TWO PERSONS @ RS.1 LAKH EACH. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD NOT HAVE T REATED AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT THEREFORE IT IS PLEADED TH AT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT WARRA NTED. 5. ON ACCEPTING THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE TH E CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION. HOWEVER THE CIT (A) 4 NEITHER VERIFIED EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSE E AS CORRECT BY HIMSELF NOR WHAT IT IT IS VERIFIED BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER. IN OUR OPINION THE CIT(A) WITHOUT PROPER VERIFICATION DELETED THE ADDITION WHICH IS NOT CORR ECT. HENCE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) TO GET VERIFIED THE FACTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE THEREUPON. 6. THE NEXT GROUND IS WITH REGARD TO DELETION OF R S.1 LAKHS ADVANCE. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE CIT(A) HEREIN A LSO DELETED THE ADDITION WITHOUT CALLING FROM THE REMAN D REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY WE DIRECT THE CIT(A) TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PU T FORTH HIS CASE AND ACCORDINGLY DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 8. THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS SUPPORTIVE OF CIT(A) ORDER WHICH BECOMES INFRUCTUOU S AS WE HAVE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATI ON. 9. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE AND THE CO FILED BY THE ASSESSE E STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 29. 9.2011 SD/ - (ASHA VIJAYA RAGHAVAN) SD/ - CHANDRA POOJARI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER 5 DATED THE 29 TH SEPT. 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE TIRUPATHI 2. SRI A. MUNIKRISHNAIAH D.NO.13-6-600/194 PK 3. LAYOUT TIRUPATHI 4. CIT(A) TIRUPATHI. 5. THE CIT HYDERABAD 6. THE DR ITAT HYDERABAD NP/