Trilochan Pati, Jagatsinghpur v. ITO, Ward-1, Paradeep, Paradeep

ITA 10/CTK/2015 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 07-10-2016 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 1022114 RSA 2015
Assessee PAN AHDPP6745K
Bench Cuttack
Appeal Number ITA 10/CTK/2015
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 4 day(s)
Appellant Trilochan Pati, Jagatsinghpur
Respondent ITO, Ward-1, Paradeep, Paradeep
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 07-10-2016
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 07-10-2016
Date Of Final Hearing 07-10-2016
Next Hearing Date 07-10-2016
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 02-01-2015
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.10 /CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 2011 SRI TRILOCHAN PATI AT: GANGADHARPUR JHYIMANI DIST: JAGATSINGHPUR VS. ITO WARD - 1 PARADEEP. PAN/GIR NO. AHDPP 6745 K (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.K.JENA REVENUE BY : SHRI ARUN MOHANTY DR DATE OF HEARING : 07 /10/ 2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07 /10/ 2016 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGA INST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) BERHAMPUR DATED 17.10.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 2011 2. THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE REVENUE ERRED IN ADDING RS.21 92 000/ - TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND OF DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUN T. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME SHOWING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3 32 478/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.38 00 000/ - IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED IN KALINGA GRAMYA BANK BALARAM PUR JAGATSINGHPUR THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED TO THE AO THAT HE SOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR A TOTAL 2 ITA NO.10/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010 - 2011 CONSIDERATION OF RS.17 16 000/ - WHICH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE SAID BANK ACCOUNT. IT WAS FURTHER SUB MITTED THAT HE WAS HAVING SAVINGS OUT OF HIS SALARY INCOME SINCE 1994 - 1995 WHICH WAS KEPT IN CASH AND ALSO DEPOSITED DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER EXAMINING THE AVAILABILITY OF CASH SAVINGS WITH THE ASSESSEE ACCEPTED TOTAL CASH SAVINGS AVAILABLE INCLUDING SALE PROCEEDS FROM THE LAND FOR DEPOSITS OF RS.31 02 454/ - AND ADDED BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.6 97 546/ - AS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). 5. LD CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK AND HELD THAT PART OF SALE PROCEEDS AMOUNTING TO RS.13 58 000/ - WERE DEPOSITED IN THIS ACCOUNT OUT OF WHICH THE ASSESSEE WITHDREW RS.7 50 000/ - ON 26.12.2009 AND RS.5 00 000/ - ON 21.1.2010 AND DEPOS ITED IN THE ACCOUNT WITH KALINGA GRAMYA BANK. HE OBSERVED THAT THE WITHDRAWAL OF RS.7 50 000/ - ON 26.12.2009 EXPLAINS PART OF DEPOSITS OF RS.15 00 000/ - MADE ON 28.8.2009 AND WITHDRAWAL OF R S.5 00 000/ - O N 21.1.2010 EXPLAINS THE DEP OSIT OF RS.3 00 000/ - IN KALINGA GRAMYA BANK ON 21.1.2010. IN OTHER WORDS RS.2 00 000/ - OUT OF RS.5 00 000/ - WITHDRAWN ON 21.1.2010 FROM INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK WAS NOT AVAILABLE FOR EXPLAINING THE TOTAL DEPO SIT OF RS.38 00 000/ - IN KALINGA GRAMYA BANK. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT HE ACCEPTS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE BY TAKING LIBERAL VIEW THAT RS.3 58 000/ - BEING SALE PROCEEDS OF LAND WAS ALSO AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE CASH DEPOSIT IN KALINGA GRAMYA BANK. IN THIS W AY THE TOTAL CASH DEPOSIT WHICH COULD BE EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE WORKS OUT TO RS.14 08 000/ - (RS.7 50 000/ - + RS.3 00 000/ - + RS.3 58 000/ - ). HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT HE ACCEPTS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT RS.2 00 000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF L AND WORTH RS.1 80 000/ - IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR WAS ALSO AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESS EE FOR MAKING DEPOSIT IN KALINGA GRAMYA BANK. THUS ACCORDING TO THE LD CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE COULD E XPLAIN TOTAL DEPOSITS IN KALINGA GRAMYA BANK FOR RS.16 08 000/ - OUT OF TOTAL DEPOSIT OF RS.38 00 000/ - . THEREFORE HE HELD THAT RS.21 92 000/ - COULD NOT BE EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH SHOULD BE ADDED AS 3 ITA NO.10/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010 - 2011 UNEXPLAINED CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREBY ENHANCED THE ADDITION BY RS.14 94 454/ - . 6. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER OF LD CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF DEPOSI T OF RS.38 00 000/ - WITH KALINGA GRAMYA BANK FROM 9.11.2009 TO 21.1.2010 BEING SALE PROCEEDS OF LAND WORTH RS.17 16 000/ - AS PER SALE DEED DATED 3.11.2009. THE SALE OF LAND IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR WAS RS.3 80 000/ - AND SALARY RECEIVED BY THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE SMT. MANJU BALA MISHRA FROM 200 0 - 0 1 TO 2009 - 2010 FROM PARADEEP PORT TRUST U.P.SCHOOL MADHUBANA PARADEEP FOR WHICH A CERTIFICATE DATED 10 .7.2012 WAS FILED BEFORE THE AO AND DISCUSSED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER . HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS TOTALLY NOT CONSIDERED THIS AMOUNT OF RS.17 6 6 000/ - AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE FOR M AKING THE DEPOSIT IN THE KALINGA GRAMYA BANK. THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING SAVINGS FROM SALARY INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE OF RS.11 79 154/ - AND SALE PROCEEDS OF LAND OF RS. 19 23 300/ - FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CASH AVAILABLE OF RS.31 02 454 / - FOR MAKING DEPOSIT IN KALINGA GRAMYA BANK. THE AO HAD NOT CONSIDERED THE SALARY RECEIPT OF THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE OF RS.17 6 6 200/ - WHILE MAKING TH E ADDITION OF RS.6 97 546/ - . THE LD CIT(A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE SAVINGS FROM THE SALARY OF THE ASSESSEE OF RS.11 79 154/ - AND SALARY RECEIPT OF THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE OF RS.17 6 6 200/ - AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT O F RS.21 92 000/ - . HE EXPLAINED THAT NO REASON HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE LD CIT(A) FOR THE SAME INSPITE OF COPIES OF RETURN OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND SALARY CERTIFICATE OF THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE FILED BEFORE THE AO AND LD CIT(A). HENCE IT WAS THE PRAYER OF THE LD A.R. THAT ADDITION OF RS.21 92 000/ - MADE BY THE LD CIT(A) BE DELETED. 8. ON THE OTHER HAND LD D.R. VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A). 9 . I FIND THAT LD CIT(A) WHILE ARRIVING AT THE FIGUR E OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.21 92 000/ - IN THE FORM OF DEPOSIT WITH KALINGA GRAMYA BANK HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE 4 ITA NO.10/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010 - 2011 SAVINGS OUT OF SALARY OF RS.11 79 154/ - CALCULATED BY THE AO WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION AND ASSIGNING ANY REASON IN HIS ORDER. THEREFORE THE ADDITION MADE TO THAT EXTEN T CANNOT BE SUSTAINED IN LAW. I THEREFORE DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.11 79 154/ - . FURTHER THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ME AND ALSO BEFORE BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WAS THAT THE SAVINGS FROM SALARY INCOME OF HIS WIFE SMT. MANJU B ALA MISHRA WERE ALSO UTILIZED IN MAKING THE DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT UNDER CONSIDERATION. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED SALARY CERTIFI CATE OF HIS WIFE FOR RECEIPT OF SALARY FROM 2000 - 2001 TO 2009 - 2010 AGGREGATING TO RS.17 66 200/ - WHICH WAS ALSO FILED BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). HOWEVER NEITHER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAS ASSIGNED ANY REASON AS TO WHY OUT OF THE SAID SALARY INCOME OF THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE. IN ABSENCE OF ANY SPECIFIC R EASONS GIVEN BY THE REVENUE I N MY CONSIDERED VIEW THE SALARY OF THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE SMT. MANJUBALA MISHRA DURING THE PERIOD 200 0 - 0 1 TO 2009 - 2010 OF RS.17 6 6 200/ - WAS SUFFICIENT TO COVER UP THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.10 12 846/ - AND THEREFORE I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) D ELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.21 92 0 00/ - BY ALLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE. 10 . IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07 /10/2016 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - ( N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 07 /10 /2016 B.K.PARIDA SPS 5 ITA NO.10/CTK/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010 - 2011 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER ASST.REGISTRAR ITAT CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : SRI TRILOCHAN PATI AT: GANGADHARPUR JHYIMANI DIST: JAGATSINGHPUR 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO WARD - 1 PARADEEP. 3. THE CIT(A) B ERHAMPUR 4. CIT B HUBANESWAR. 5. DR ITAT CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//