Smt Monica Malhotra, Jalandhar v. The Asstt .Commissioner of .Income-tax, Jalandhar

ITA 114/ASR/2011 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2012 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 11420914 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AARPM2971P
Bench Amritsar
Appeal Number ITA 114/ASR/2011
Duration Of Justice 11 month(s) 21 day(s)
Appellant Smt Monica Malhotra, Jalandhar
Respondent The Asstt .Commissioner of .Income-tax, Jalandhar
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-03-2012
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 30-03-2012
Date Of Final Hearing 27-03-2012
Next Hearing Date 27-03-2012
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 08-04-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. B.P.JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.114(ASR)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004-05 PAN: AARPM2971P SMT. MONICA MALHOTRA VS. THE ASSTT. COMMR. OF INCO ME-TAX C/O M/. MALHOTRA BOOK DEPOT RANGE-IV JALANDHAR. JALANDHAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. SUDHIR SEHGAL ADV. RESPONDENT BY: SH. AMRIK CHAND DR DATE OF HEARING :29/03/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:30/03/2012 ORDER PER BENCH; THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) JALANDHAR DATED 24.01.201 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRESSED GROUND NO.2 AND TH EREFORE THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 3. GROUND NOS. 3 TO 7 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE THEREF ORE DO NOT REQUIRE ANY ADJUDICATION. 4. THE SOLE GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEE READS AS UN DER: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) JALANDHAR HAS WRONGLY CONF IRMED THE ADDITION OF RS.5.00 LAKH ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAI NED CREDIT ENTRY AND IS CHALLENGED. ITA NO.114(ASR)/2011 2 5. THE BRIEF FACTS IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER AOS ORDER ARE AS UNDER: THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUESTED TO EXPLAIN ALL THE CRED IT ENTRIES IN HER BANK ACCOUNT WAS FOUND THAT THERE WAS A CREDIT ENTR Y OF RS.5 00 000/- IN BANK ACCOUNT NO.36958 IN CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA DELHI AS ON 16.7.2003 WITH NARRATION SALE OF CAR. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUESTED TO FURNISH EVIDENCE OF SALE OF CAR VIDE QUESTIONNAIRE ISSUED ON 6.6.2006. HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE ONLY REPLIED VIDE REPLY DAT ED 7.9.2006 THAT REGARDING SALE OF CAR AMOUNTING TO RS.5 00 000/- IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE OLD CAR WAS SOLD TO SH. AMIT CHA DHA S/O SH. P.S. CHADHA R/O 9 MALKHA GANJ DELHI-07. THE SALE PROCE EDS AMOUNTING TO RS.5 00 000/- HAS BEEN DULY CREDITED IN MY SAVIN G A/C NO.29628 FROM CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA DELHI ON 16.07.2003. SUBSEQUENTLY THE BUYER WAS ISSUED A NOTICE U/S 13 3(6) TO CONFIRM IF THE CAR WAS ACTUALLY SOLD BUT THE REGIST ERED LETTER WAS RECEIVED BACK WITH WRITTEN NOTE LEFT WITHOUT ADDRE SS. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED VIDE QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 13 .9.2006 TO FURNISH EVIDENCE OF THE SALE OF CAR. HOWEVER THE A SSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH SUCH EVIDENCE. AGAIN VIDE QUESTIONNAIRE DA TED 12.9.2006 THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED UPON TO PRODUCE THE BUYER OF TH E CAR IN QUESTION OR TO FURNISH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN TOKEN OF HAVI NG SOLD THE CAR TO THE SAID PURCHASER. BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE DICTUM OF SALE HENCE THE CREDIT ENTRY OF RS.5 00 000/- REMAIN S UNSUBSTANTIATED. ACCORDINGLY IT IS HELD THAT THE CREDIT ENTRY REPRE SENTS THE ASSESSEES OWN INCOME EARNED FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND TH E SAME IS ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THE WHOLE DISPUTE IS WITH REGARD TO THE CONFIRMATIO N OF SALE OF OLD CAR WHICH WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN SOLD FOR RS.5 00 000/- TO ONE SH. AMIT CHADHA S/O SH. P.S. CHADHA R/O 9 MALKHA GANJ DELHI-07. THE STATED BUYER WAS ISSUED A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 133(6) OF THE ACT TO CONF IRM IF THE CAR WAS ACTUALLY SOLD TO HIM. THE REGISTERED LETTER WAS RECEIVED BAC K WITH WRITTEN NOTE LEFT ITA NO.114(ASR)/2011 3 WITHOUT ADDRESS. THE ASSESSE COULD NOT FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO SALE OF SAID CAR. IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 13.09.2006 IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE OLD CAR HAS BEEN SOLD AND NEW CAR H AS BEEN PURCHASED AS PER COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED CONFIRMATION OF THE ACCOUNTANT SH. AMIT CHADHA. TH E AO HAS NOT VERIFIED THE GENUINENESS OF THE SAID CONFIRMATION AND THERE FORE IT IS PRE-MATURE TO LEAD TO A CONCLUSION ADVERSE TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WI LL BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE IF THE GENUINENESS OF THE CONTENTS OF THE CONFIRMATION SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF SH. AMIT CHADHA IS VERIFIED AND THE MATTE R IS DECIDED ACCORDINGLY. THEREFORE THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF TH E AO TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AS DIRECTED ABOVE BUT BY AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30TH MARCH 2012. SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 30TH MARCH 2012 /SKR/ COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE: SMT. MONICA MALHOTRA JAANDHAR. 2. THE ACIT R-IV JLR 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE SR DR