The ITO, Ward-9(4),, Ahmedabad v. Shri Satyanarayan T.Agarwal,, Ahmedabad

ITA 1068/AHD/2013 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2016 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 106820514 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN ADDPA7779E
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 1068/AHD/2013
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant The ITO, Ward-9(4),, Ahmedabad
Respondent Shri Satyanarayan T.Agarwal,, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-09-2016
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 30-09-2016
Date Of Final Hearing 28-09-2016
Next Hearing Date 28-09-2016
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 17-04-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV JM & SHRI MANISH BORA D AM. ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR: 2009-10 ITO WD-9(4) AHMEDABAD. VS. SHRI SATYANARAYAN T. AGARWAL 16-D AVKAR APARTMENT ODHAV NR. NAVRANG HIGH SCHOOL ODHAV AHMEDABAD. APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN ADDPA 7779E APPELLANT BY SHRI JAMES KURIEN SR.DR RESPONDENT BY NONE DATE OF HEARING: 28/9/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30/9/2016 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE REVENUE FOR ASST. YEAR 20 09-10 AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) XV AHMEDABAD DATED 23 RD JANUARY 2013 VIDE APPEAL NO.CIT(A)XV/ITO/9(4)/324/11-12 PAS SED AGAINST ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) FRAMED ON 17/10/2011 BY ITO WD-9(4) AHMEDABAD. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AS SESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPORT CON TRACTOR. RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASST. YEAR 2009-10 WAS FILED ON 24.9.200 9 DECLARING TOTAL ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 2 INCOME AT RS.2 03 290/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND NOTICES U/S 143(2) & 142(1) OF THE A CT ALONG WITH QUESTIONNAIRE WERE ISSUED WHICH WERE DULY REPLIED B Y THE ASSESSEE AND LD. AR ATTENDED FROM TIME TO TIME AND SUBMITTED AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND TAX AUDIT REPORT.. ON VERIFICATION OF B OOKS OF ACCOUNTS LD. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT GROSS TOTAL REC EIPT OF RS.44 95 417/- HAS BEEN SHOWN. ON CROSS VERIFICATIO N OF THE GROSS RECEIPTS SHOWN AND IN THE PROFITS AND LOSS ACCOUNT WITH GROSS CONTRACT AMOUNT SHOWN IN FORM 26AS ON INCOME-TAX WEB-SITE LD . ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE FIGURES SHOWN IN THE WEB SITE STOOD AT RS.60 98 324/- AS AGAINST RS.44 95 417/- SHOWN IN T HE BOOKS. LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUPPRESSED RECEIPTS OF RS.16 02 907/- AND ACCORDINGLY MADE ADD ITION OF THIS UNDISCLOSED RECEIPTS. IT WAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT CAS H ON VARIOUS DATES WAS DEPOSITED IN S.B. A/C WITH ICICI BANK AHMEDABAD TOTALING TO RS.39 12 381/- AND IN LACK OF NECESSARY DETAILS AND EVIDENCES FROM ASSESSEE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER INVOKED THE PROVISI ONS OF SECTION 68 AND MADE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CR EDIT AT RS.39 21 381/-. IN TOTAL AFTER MAKING AN ADDITION O F RS.55 24 288 (16 02 907/- + 39 21 381/-) INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS.57 27 578/-. 3. IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ASSESSEE GOT PART RELIEF. 4. NOW REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 3 6. SINCE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE W E PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR AND GOIN G THROUGH THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 7. FIRST WE TAKE UP GROUND NO.1 WHICH READS AS UNDE R :- 1) THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XV AHMEDABAD HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ADOPTING THE PROFIT @1 0% OF THE UNDISCLOSED CONTRACT RECEIPT. 8. LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 9. WE HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND GONE THROUGH THE RECORD S PLACED BEFORE US. ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) WE FIND THAT DETAILED SPEAKING ORDER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE FACTS HAS BEEN PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) SUSTAINING 10% OF THE UNDISCLO SED RECEIPT OF RS.16 02 907/- BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 5. THE A.O. ON THE BASIS OF ITS DETAILS AND ANNUAL INFORMATION REPORT GATHERED THAT THE TOTAL RECEIPT OF THE APPELLANT DURING PREV IOUS YEAR IS OF RS. 60 98 324/- ON WHICH TDS WAS DEDUCTED U/S 194C OF THE ACT BY PAYER COMPANIES/PARTIES AND DEPOSITED IN TO GOVT. ACCOUNT. AS AGAINST THIS TOTA L RECEIPT THE APPELLANT'S AUDITED BOOKS OF ACCOUNT SHOWS ONLY RS. 44 95 417/-AS TOTAL RECEIPT. IT IS THEREFORE THE DIFFERENCE OF RS 16 02 907/- (60 98 324 -44 95 417) WAS THE CONTRACTUAL RECEIPT WHICH WAS NOT REFLECTED BY APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANY EXPLANATION BEFORE THE A.O. AND THEREFORE HE MADE A DDITION OF THIS ENTIRE AMOUNT. DURING APPEAL PROCEEDING APPELLANT CONTENDED THAT HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE AUDITED DULY SUPPORTED BY BILLS & VOUCHERS FOR WHIC H A.O. HAS NOT GIVEN ANY ADVERSE FINDINGS. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT ONE OF THE PAYER PARTY HAS PAID THE FREIGHT FOR TRANSPORTATION DIRECTLY TO THE TRUCK OW NER WHO TRANSPORTED THE GOODS OF THAT COMPANY AND THE APPELLANT WAS TO RECEIVE HIS C OMMISSION PART IN THE FORM OF TDS BUT NO SUCH INTIMATION OR CERTIFICATE WAS RECEI VED BY APPELLANT HENCE THIS RECEIPT OR SUCH COMMISSION WAS NOT SHOWN. THE APPEL LANT FURTHER RELIED ON ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 4 HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF MITESH ROLLING MILLS P. LTD. TO EMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT IT IS ONLY THE REAL INCOME OR NET OF RECEIPT & PAYMENT WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE TAXED AND NOT THE ENTIRE GR OSS RECEIPT. THE APPELLANT EXCEPT THIS CONTENTION HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANY DETAIL S OR EVIDENCES TO SUPPORT HIS CONTENTION I.E. FROM WHICH SUCH PARTY THE SAID REC EIPT WERE NOT ACCOUNTED. TO VERIFY THE FACTS AND CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT FORM NO. 26AS AS AVAILABLE IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT FOR PREVIOUS YEAR WAS EXAMINE D (A PRINT OUT COPY IS ENCLOSED WITH THIS ORDER AS ANN. -A FOR READY REFER ENCE ) THIS FORM SHOW DETAILS IN THE FORM OF NAME OF THE PAYER/PARTIES FROM WHOM APPELLANT RECEIVED TRANSPORTATION CHARGES TOTAL SUCH RECEIVED OR CRED ITED AMOUNT OF TDS INCLUDING SURCHARGES ETC. DEDUCTED OUT OF SUCH PAYMENT AND DA TE OF DEPOSIT OF SUCH TDS. A PARTY WISE SUMMARY IS PREPARED REFLECTING THE TOT AL AMOUNT OF HIRE CHARGES RECEIVED FROM ONE PARTY AND TDS DEDUCTED ON IT. THE SAME IS AS FOLLOWS: PAYER OR PARTIES FROM WHOM TRANSPORTATION CHARGE RECEIVED. AMOUNT PAID/CREDITED TDS DEDUCTED 1. MARUTI CARGO AND CHEMICALS PVT. LTD. 23 82 540 24 540 2.GULSHAN SUGARS & CHEMICALS LTD. 47 127 971 3. JAIMURTY MINERALS & CHEMICALS PVT. LTD. 20 52 841 46 519 4. CALCHEM INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD. 16 16 816 36 618 TOTAL ; 60 98 324 1 08 648 SHOWN BY APPELLANT 44 95 316 72 417 BALANCE 16 03 008 36 231 IT IS ALSO GATHERED FROM THE DETAILS OF RETURN OF I NCOME FILED BY APPELLANT THAT TDS AMOUNT OF RS.72 417/- WAS CLAIMED BY APPELLANT AND NOT RS. 1 08 6487- AS PER THIS DETAIL. FURTHER THE TAX AUDIT REPORT IN FORM 3 CB & 3CD DT. 21/09/2009 IN ITS PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT SHOWS THAT APPELLANT CREDITED RS. 44 95 316/- (NOT 44 95 417 I- AS TAKEN BY A.O.)AS HIRE RECEIPT. THIS GIVES A DISC REPANCY OF NON RECORDING OF RECEIPT OF RS. 16 03 008/- AS WELL AS NON CLAIM OF RS. 36 231/- AS TDS. THE APPELLANT'S REPLY DT. 28/02/2011 TO THE A.O. IN RESPECT OF RECONCILIATION OF RECEIPTS AS PER TDS CERTIFICATE AS PER BOOKS OF ACC OUNT HAS FOLLOWING DETAIL NAME OF PARTY TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSPORTATION CHARGES RECEIVED/CREDITED. TDS (A) CALCHEM INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. 59935 1198 (B) MARUTI CARGO AND CHEMICAL PVT. LTD. 2382540 24540 (C) JAI MURTHY MINRAL & CHEMICALS PVT. LTD. 2052841 46519 TOTAL 4495316 72257 ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 5 IT IS THEREFORE SUCH DISCREPANCY CAN BE ATTRIBUTED FOR NON RECORDING OF RECEIPT FROM M/S CALCHEM INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD. AND GULSHA N SUGAR & CHEMICALS. IT IS THEREFORE I AM PARTLY INCLINED WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT HE WAS NOT INFORMED NOR GIVEN TDS CERTIFICATE BY M/S CALCHEM I NDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD. IN RESPECT OF FREIGHT PAID BY THEM DIRECTLY TO TRUCK O WNER FOR TRANSPORTATION OF GOODS BUT NAME OF APPELLANT WAS INCLUDED IN THE RETURN FI LED FOR TDS DEDUCTED OUT OF SUCH PAYMENT. THIS POSITION IS SUPPORTED BY THE FAC T THAT APPELLANT IS NOT OWNING ANY TRUCK BUT ARRANGES SUCH TRANSPORTATION AS & WHE N REQUIRED BY THE PARTY. FURTHER CONSIDERING THE DISCREPANCY OF RS.16 03 008 /- ON RECEIPT (TDS RS.36 231/-) AS AGAINST TOTAL RECEIPT FROM SUCH PAR TY OF RS. 16 15 816/- (TDS RS. 36 6187-) THE APPELLANT HAS DONE PART WORK OF THIS PARTY AND APPELLANT IS KNOWN TO THIS PARTY. IT IS THEREFORE IF THE APPELLANT HA S GIVEN CREDIT OF TDS OF RS. 1 08 648/- THOUGH IT CLAIMED ONLY RS. 72 417/- THE INCOME FROM THE CORRESPONDING RECEIPT OF RS. 16 03 008/- HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AND NOT THE ENTIRE RECEIPT. THE APPELLANT ALSO CONTENDED THE SAME BY R ELYING ON HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT ORDER. IT IS IN THIS REGARD THE P & L A CCOUNT OF APPELLANT REFLECT THAT OUT OF TOTAL RECEIPT OF RS. 44 95 316/- THE APPELLANT CLAIMED HIRE CHARGES OF RS. 40 45 784/- I.E. THE GROSS PROFIT IS SHOWN AT RS. 4 49 532/-. (4495316-4045784) I.E. 10% OF RECEIPT. NOW CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT APPELLANT ALREADY'CLAIMED OTHER EXPENDITURE HENCE IT WILL BE REASONABLE TO CONSIDER 10% OF INCOME FROM THE RECEIPT OF RS. 16 03 008/- I.E. RS. 1 60 300/- WHIC H CAN BE ADDED TO TOTAI INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. THE A.O. IS THEREFORE DIRECTED TO ADOPT THE FIGURE OF RS. 1 60 3007- FOR ADDITION AT THE PLACE OF RS. 16 02 9 07/-. THE ADDITION TO THIS EXTENT IS UPHELD AND CONFIRMED. THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 14 42 607/-(16 02 907 - 1 60 300) IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. THE APPELLANT GETS RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. AS PER DEMAND NOTICE U/S 156 OF THE ACT DT. 17/10/11 IT I S GATHERED THAT INTEREST U/S 244A OF RS. 5 687/- IS CHARGED I.E. THE APPELLANT W AS GRANTED REFUND WHILE PROCESSING U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE THOUGH NO SUCH GROUND IS MADE BY APPELLANT IN GROUNDS OF APPEAL BUT THE BASIS OF ADD ITION IS ON ACCOUNT OF FORM 26AS AND TDS DEDUCTION THE A.O. IS DIRECTED TO VER IFY ABOUT THE CREDIT OF TDS GIVEN TO APPELLANT AND THE SAME SHOULD BE AS PER FO RM 26AS IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT I.E. AT RS. 1 08 6487- INSTEAD OF AS CLAI MED BY APPELLANT IN RETURN OF INCOME AT RS. 72 417-. 10. FROM GOING THROUGH THE FINDINGS OF LD. CIT(A) W E ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE IMPUGNED UNDISCLOSED RECEIPT WAS ON ACCOUN T OF PAYMENTS DIRECTLY MADE BY THE PARTIES OF ASSESSEE TO THE TRU CK OWNERS AND TAX WAS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE. THE RE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE ON THE PART OF ASSESSEE IN NOT BEI NG ABLE TO ENTER SUCH DIRECT PAYMENTS TO TRUCK OWNERS IN ITS BOOKS O F ACCOUNT. ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 6 FURTHER THE IMPUGNED GROSS RECEIPT CANNOT BE TREATE D AS INCOME AS IT IS IN THE NATURE OF FREIGHT CHARGES AND THE PROFITS ELEMENT IN THE IMPUGNED RECEIPT CAN ONLY BE TAXED AND NOT THE GROS S AMOUNT. THEREFORE LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY SUSTAINED THE ADD ITION TO THE EXTENT OF 10% OF THE GROSS RECEIPT. WE FIND NO REASON TO I NTERFERE WITH THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A). WE UPHOLD THE SAME. THIS GRO UND OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 11. NOW WE TAKE GROUND NO.2 WHICH READS AS UNDER :- 2) THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XV AHMEDABAD HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.39 21 281/~ MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT. 12. THIS ADDITION MADE U/S 68 AT RS.39 21 381/- WAS TOWARDS CASH DEPOSIT ON VARIOUS DATES IN THE YEAR IN THE S.B. AC COUNT IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE. FROM GOING THROUGH THE SUBMISSIONS MAD E BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IT IS PERTINENT TO NOT E THAT THE IMPUGNED BANK ACCOUNT IN WHICH CASH WAS DEPOSITED STANDS DUL Y DISCLOSED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS WHICH HAVE BEEN AUDITED AND ALL T HE TRANSACTIONS SHOWN IN THIS IMPUGNED BANK ACCOUNT ARE DULY ACCOUN TED FOR IN REGULAR BOOKS. 13. WE FURTHER OBSERVE THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A CLEAR FINDING ON THIS ISSUE AND HAS DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVIN G AS BELOW :- NOW COMING TO OTHER GROUND AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS. 39 21 381/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT ON THE FACT THAT APPELLANTS BANK ACCOUNT AT IC ICI BANK SHOWS FREQUENT CASH DEPOSIT IN TOTAL OF RS. 39 21 381/- FOR WHICH APPE LLANT FAILED TO OFFER ANY EXPLANATION FOR ITS SOURCE BEFORE A.O. HENCE HE MAD E THIS ADDITION U/S 68. THE ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 7 APPELLANT TOOK THE OBJECTION THAT SUCH ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT IS NOT LEGALLY CORRECT SINCE THE DEPOSIT IS FOUND IN APPELLANT'S P ASS BOOK OF BANK AND AS PER HON'BIE BOMBAY HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF C IT POONA VS. BHAICHAND H. GANDHI THE BANK PASS BOOK IS ; NOT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. WITH DUE REGARDS TO SUCH DECISION I AM NOT INCLINED* WITH APPELLANT THAT IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT HE HAD NOT OFFERED ANY EXPLANATION FOR THE SOURCE OF SUCH CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT THE A.O.'S FINDING WHICH IS IN CONFORMITY OF UNEXPLAINE D CASH DEPOSITED IN SUBSTANCE BE SETASIDED JUST ON TECHNICAL REASON THAT HE MADE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT. IN MY VIEW SECTION 292B OF THE ACT WILL TAKE DUE CARE OF SUCH ASSTT. AND I MYSELF HAS THE POWER COTERMINOUS WITH THAT OF A.O. AND TO REPLACE THE PART OR PORTION OF ASSTT. ORDER WITH MY OWN ORDER. IT IS IN THIS REGAR D I TREAT SUCH ADDITION BY A.O. IN SUBSTANCE U/S 69 OF THE ACT. THIS GROUNDS IS THEREF ORE DISMISSED AS FAR AS TECHNICALITY IS CONCERNED. ON MERIT THE APPELLANT CONTENDED THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT REFLECT THE DEPOSIT OF CASH FROM THE HIRE R ECEIPT AND WITHDRAWAL OF CASH FROM THE SAME ACCOUNT AND ALTERNATIVELY IF A.O. WAN TS TO MAKE ANY ADDITION ONLY THE PEAK AMOUNT CAN BE ADDED. IT IS IN THIS REGARD A COPY OF APPELLANT'S BANK ACCOUNT NO. 624401518551 WITH ICICL BANK MANINAGAR BRANCH WAS EXAMINED FOR THE PERIOD 01/04/08 TO 31/03/09. IT IS WORTH NOTING AT THIS MOMENT THAT THIS BANK ACCOUNT IS DULY REFLECTED BY APPELLANT IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT SINCE THE CLOSING BANK BALANCE OF RS. 2 224/- IS DULY TALLIED IN ITS AUDITED BALANCE SHEET.YLT IS VERIFIED THAT THE APPELLANT DEPOSITED RS. 70 49 895 /- (BOTH CASH & CHEQUE INCLUDING TRANSFER ENTRIES) IN THIS ACCOUNT AND WIT HDRAWN RS. 70.59.164/- (BOTH CASH & CHEQUE INCLUDINA TRANSFER ENTRIES) DURING TH E PREVIOUS YEAR. IT IS ALSO VERIFIED THAT OUT OF TOTAL DEPOSIT OF RS. 70 49 895 /- AN AMOUNT OF RS. 31 28 413/- IS DEPOSITED THROUGH CHEQUE OR TRANSFER ENTRY AND S IMILARLY OUT OF RS. 70 59 162/- WITHDRAWALS AN AMOUNT OF RS. 9 95 099/- IS WITHDRAW N THROUGH CHEQUE OR TRANSFER ENTRY. CONSIDERING THE TOTAL HIRE RECEIPT SHOWN BY APPELLANT OF RS. 44 95 316/- AND DEPOSIT OF CHEQUE & TRANSFER ENTRIES OF RS. 31 28 413/- IT CAN BE CONCLUDED THAT THE APPELLANT IS IN RECEIPT OF HIRE CHARGES IN CASH ALSO. CONSIDERING THE CONTRA ENTRIES OUT OF SUCH DEPOSIT AND WITHDRAWALS I AM INCLINED WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT ALL THE ENTRIES AS APPEARING IN THIS DISCLOSED BANK ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 8 ACCOUNT IS FROM THE BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS OF THE AP PELLANT. THE CASH SO DEPOSITED OF RS. 39 21 482/- (7049895 - 3128413) IS EITHER RECEIPT OF BUSINESS OR MADE OUT OF THE WITHDRAWALS FROM THIS ACCOUNT BESID E THE CONTRA ENTRIES. IT IS THEREFORE SUCH DEPOSIT IS EXPLAINED AND THERE IS NO NEED TO MAKE ANY ADDITION U/S 69 OF THE ACT OR OF PEAK CREDIT OF THIS DISCLOSED A CCOUNT. THE MINOR DIFFERENCE IF AT ALL THERE IS DULY EXPLAINED BY THE NATURE OF RECEIP T OF APPELLANT I.E. HIRE RECEIPT FOR WHICH AN ADDITION IS ALREADY MADE. THE A.O. IS THER EFORE DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION SO MADE OF RS. 39 21 281/-. THE APPELLANT GETS RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. 13. FROM GOING THROUGH THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) AN D THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHO RITIES AND IN ABSENCE OF ANY CONTRARY EVIDENCE PLACED BY LD. DR A GAINST THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A) WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT AS T HE IMPUGNED BANK ACCOUNT IN WHICH CASH HAS BEEN DEPOSITED HAS BEEN S HOWN IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ALL THE DEBITS AND CRE DITS IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN THE RELATED ACCOUNT IN THE BOOKS AND THE CLOSING BANK BALANCE OF SB ACCOUNT IS ALSO SHOW N IN THE AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS OBSERVED BY LD. CIT(A). CERTAINLY THERE IS NO ELEMENT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT SO AS TO INVOKE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT AS THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT OF RS. 39 21 381/- IS DULY EXPLAINED EITHER AS BUSINESS RECEIPT OR OUT OF REGULAR CASH WITHDRAWAL. WE THEREFORE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFE RE WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND UPHOLD THE SAME. THIS GROUND OF REVE NUE IS ALSO DISMISSED. 14. GROUND NOS. 3 & 4 ARE OF GENERAL NATURE WHICH NEED NO ADJUDICATION. ITA NO. 1068/AHD/2013 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 9 15. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER 2016 SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 30/9/2016 MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 29/09/2016 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 30/09/2016 OTHER MEMBER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: __________ 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 30/9/16 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: