ITO, New Delhi v. Mrs. Pushplata Paliwal, New Delhi

ITA 2051/DEL/2012 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 205120114 RSA 2012
Assessee PAN AAKPP0829J
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2051/DEL/2012
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
Appellant ITO, New Delhi
Respondent Mrs. Pushplata Paliwal, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 31-10-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 28-10-2013
Next Hearing Date 28-10-2013
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 02-05-2012
Judgment Text
ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 20 51 /DEL/201 2 A.Y. : 2008-09 I.T.O. WARD 25(4) 304-D 3 RD FLOOR VIKAS BHAWAN NEW DELHI VS. MRS. PUSHPLATA PALIWAL 1058-B NAJAFGARH NEW DELHI-110043 (PAN: AAKPP0829J) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. VED JAIN CA DEPARTMENT BY : SH. VIVEEK KUMAR SR. D.R. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXIV NEW DELHI DATED 07.2.2012 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED READ AS UNDER:- 1. IN DELETING THE ESTIMATED ADDITION OF INTEREST OF RS. 5 50 000/- MADE BY THE AO VIOLATING THE RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES AS THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORIT Y WHICH WERE NEVER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 2 2. IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 LAC MADE BY TH E AO ON ACCOUNT OF ESTIMATED SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF SHARES VIOLATING THE RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES AS THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH WERE NEVER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 3. IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 16 60 000/- MA DE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PROPERTY VIOLATING THE RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES AS THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WERE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH WERE NEVER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 4. IN DIRECTING THE AO TO TREAT THE INCOME OF RS. 1 00 000/- AS AGRICULTURE INCOME VIOLATING THE RUL E 46A OF THE I.T. AS THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WERE FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHICH WERE NEVER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 5. IN ACCEPTING THE SWEEPING SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH DOES NOT STAND SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE ON RECORD OF THE AO AND IN ACCEPTING SELF SERVING DOCUMENTS NOT CORROBORATED OR EXAMINED DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE THUS DENYING OPPORTUNITY OF HOLISTIC EXAMINATION TO THE AO DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 3 6. SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE TH E MATTER BACK TO THE AO TO REEXAMINE FRESH EVIDENCE IN A HOLISTIC MANNER. 3. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER THE ASSESSEE APPEALED B EFORE THE LD. CIT(A). ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CES WHICH THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED. THE CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE AS SESSEES GROUND OF APPEAL AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE. 4. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT LD. CI T(A) HAS ACCEPTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES IN VIOLATION OF R ULE 46A. HENCE IT HAS BEEN PLEADED BY THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTA TIVE THAT THE MATTER BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. AO TO RE- EXAMINE THE FRESH EVIDENCE. LD. DR FURTHER RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF MANISH BUILDWELL 245 CTR 397 AND MODERN CHARITABLE FOUNDAT ION 335 ITR 105. 5.1 ON THE OTHER HAND LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITED THAT ASSESSEE HAS PROPERLY FILED THE ADDITIONAL EVI DENCES WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN SENT BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE LD. AO FOR THE REMAND REPORT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. AO HAS ALSO SUB MITTED THE REMAND REPORT WHICH HAS BEEN DULY CONSIDERED BY THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE HE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO CASE OF VIOLA TION OF RULE 46A. 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS NOTED THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A REQUESTING FOR SUBMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ON THE GROUND THAT THE ITP/ACC OUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE SH. SK JAIN WHO IS A SEVERE DIABETIC PATIE NT STARTED TO SUFFER FROM NEUROLOGY DISORDER AS A RESULT HE COU LD NOT SPEAK OR WRITE PROPERLY. SHE SUBMITTED THAT BECAUSE OF THIS SHE COULD NOT ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 4 SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTS TO THE LD. AO IN TIME. THUS SHE SUBMITTED THAT SHE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM ATT ENDING BEFORE THE LD. AO AND MAKING NECESSARY COMPLIANCE. LD. CI T(A) ACCEPTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND THESE EVIDENCES WER E REMANDED TO THE LD. AO LD. AO OBJECTED TO THE ADMISSION OF THE SAME. BUT LD. CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE SUBMISSION THAT ASSESSEE WAS P REVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE IN FILING THE EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD. AO. HENCE LD. CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND REQUIR ED THE LD. AO TO SUBMIT HIS COMMENTS ON THE MERITS OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. LD. AO ASKED FOR THREE MONTHS TIME FOR PREPARATION OF REMAND REPORT. ULTIMATELY THE REMAND REPORT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE L D. AO ON 18.1.2013 IN WHICH THE LD. AO MERELY REITERATED THE STAND TAKEN AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE ON EACH ISSUE INSTEAD OF ANA LYZING THE ISSUE IN LIGHT OF FRESH EVIDENCES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESS EE. LD. CIT(A) NOTED THAT DESPITE SEEKING TIME OF ALMOST THREE MON THS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE REMAND REPORT THE LD. AO DID N OT COMMENT ON THE MERITS OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AT ALL. 7. IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS CORRECTLY ACCEPTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. IT CA NNOT BE SAID THAT LD. AO WAS DENIED ANY OPPORTUNITY TO GO THROUGH TH E ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. LD. AO HAS ASKED THREE MONTHS TIME FOR SUBMISSION OF THE REMAND REPORT LD. CIT(A) HAS DULY GIVEN THE TI ME. THEREAFTER THE LD. AO DID NOT ANALYZE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES PROPERLY. THEREAFTER LD. CIT(A) EVALUATED THE ADDITIONAL EVI DENCES AND GAVE A VERY COGENT AND SPEAKING ORDER ON ALL ISSUES CONCER NED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE FIND THAT THE ALLEGATION BY THE R EVENUE THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE ADDITION IN VIOLATION OF RUL E 46A IS DEVOID OF COGENCY. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE HOLD THAT LD. AO HAS BEEN GIVEN PROPER OPPORTUNITY BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO EXAMI NE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. HENCE LD. CIT(A)S ORDER ON THIS ACCOUNT CANNOT BE SAID TO ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 5 BE SUFFERING FROM ANY SHORTCOMING. THE CASE LAW R ELIED UPON BY THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ARE NOT APPLICA BLE ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS THE LD. AO IN THIS CASE HAS BEEN GI VEN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO EXAMINE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. 8. APROPOS DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 2 16 60 000/ - ON ACCOUNT INVESTMENT IN PROPERTY. THIS ISSUE PERTAINS TO ADDITION WITH REFERENCE TO CASH INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE OF LAND AT BHOPAL PURCHASE OF STAMP PAPERS AND INCIDENTAL EXPENSES AS MENTIONED BY THE SUB-REGISTRAR IN THE SALE DEED RESPECTIVELY. ON THIS ISSUE LD. CIT(A) NOTED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNDER:- THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT LAND WAS PURCHASED BY HER AT BHOPAL JOINTLY WITH SMT. SWATI PALIWAL. SHE SUBMITT ED THAT THE AO HAD CONDUCTED INDEPENDENT ENQUIRIES AND HAD PRO CURED THE SALE DEED OF THE LAND U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT FR OM THE SUB- REGISTRAR BHOPAL DIRECTLY. THEREFORE THERE WAS N O DOUBT THAT THE LAND WAS PURCHASED BY HER JOINTLY WITH SMT. SWA TI PALIWAL WITH EACH OF THEM MAKING AN INVESTMENT OF RS. 1 CR ORE. DESPITE HAVING THIS INFORMATION AS PER THE SALE DEE D THE AO PROCEEDED TO ADD THE COMPLETE AMOUNT OF RS. 2 CROR ES IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT WHICH WAS TOTALLY UNJUSTIFI ED. THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED AN AFFIDAVIT IN WHICH SHE HAS AVERRED THAT SHE PAID HER SHARE OF RS. 1 CRORE FOR PURCHASE OF L AND THROUGH HER SHARE OF RS. 1 CRORE FOR PURCHASE OF LAND THROU GH HER SB A/C NO. 10493151066 IN STATE BANK OF INDIA NAJAFGARH V ILLAGE OLD ROSHANPURA NEW DELHI. SHE FURTHER AVERRED THAT ALL OTHER EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF STAMP DUTY AND REGISTRAR FEE S WAS SHARED 50:50 BY HER ALONG WITH CO PURCHASER SMT. SW ATI PALIWAL R/O 1029B NEAR JAIN MANDIR NAJAFGARH N EW DELHI ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 6 AND THAT SHE HAD BORNE THESE EXPENSES IN CASH OUT OF HER REGULAR CASH ACCOUNT. COPY OF THE PURCHASE DEED OF LAND BEARING KHASRA NO. 126/2/2 BEING 4.70 ACRES IN VILL AGE JAT KHERI TEHSIL HUZOOR DISTRICT BHOPAL HAS BEEN PLAC ED ON RECORD WHICH PROVES THAT THE EXPENDITURE WAS SHARE D BY BOTH CO PURCHASERS IN A RATIO OF 50:50. THE APPELLANT S UBMITTED A BANK CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY STATE BANK OF INDIA NAJ AFGARH NEW DELHI 110 043 STATING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD TRAN SFERRED RS. 1 CRORE FROM HER BANK ACCOUNT NO. 10493151066 TO THE BANK ACCOUNT OF MRS. RASHMI PATHAK (THE SELLER OF THE LA ND) IN SBI BHOPAL BEING ACCOUNT NO. 10107787956 ON 24.3.2008 V IDE CHEQUE NO. 419514. AS REGARDS THE SOURCE SHE SUBM ITTED THAT SHE HAD TAKEN A LOAN OF RS. 1 CRORE FROM HER HUSBA ND SH. MAHENDER PAL PALIWAL BY TRANSFER FROM HIS ACCOUNT N O. 30047039939 IN SBI NAJAFGARH NEW DELHI TO HER BAN K ACCOUNT IN THE SAME BRANCH ON 24.3.2008. COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT AS WELL AS SH. MAHENDER PAL PALIWA L (APPELLANTS HUSBAND) HAVE BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. CASH FLOW STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN GIVEN AT PAGE N O. 62/PB EVIDENCING CASH PAYMENT OF RS. 8 45 000/- FOR STAM P DUTY AND INCIDENTAL EXPENSES FOR PURCHASE OF LAND AT BHOPAL. NOT ONLY THIS THE APPELLANT HAD ALSO SUBMITTED AN AFFIDAVIT FROM SMT. SWATI PALIWAL CO PURCHASER OF THE LAND WHO HAS AV ERRED THAT SHE HAS INVESTED RS. 1 CRORE IN PURCHASE OF LAND AL ONG WITH SMT. PUSHPALATA PALIWAL AND THAT SHE HAD FINANCED T HIS TRANSACTION OUT OF LOANS TAKEN FROM HER FATHER-IN-L AW SH. RAMESH CHAND AND HER BROTHER IN LAW SH. LOKESH KUMA R BOTH OF WHOM HAD RECEIVED COMPENSATION FROM THE GOVER NMENT FOR COMPULSORY ACQUISITION OF LAND. SHE SUBMITTED C OPY OF BANK ACCOUNT AS WELL AS BANK CERTIFICATE AS EVIDENC E OF THE TRANSACTION. THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT THE CONTE NTION OF THE ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 7 AO THAT THE PAN OF SMT. SWATI PALIWAL GIVEN BY HER WAS NOT CORRECT DOE SNOT HOLD ANY MERIT SINCE SMT. SWATI PALIWAL IS ALSO ASSESSED TO TAX WITH THE SAME AO AND THE MIST AKE IN PAN WAS JUST A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR. 9. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS LD. CIT(A) HA S OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED OVERWHELMING THE EV IDENCES IN FAVOUR OF HER CONTENTION. HENCE LD. CIT(A) HAS HE LD THAT IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF ADDITION OF RS. 2 14 60 00 0/- AND RS. 2 LACS MADE TO HER INCOME BY THE LD. AO HAD BECOME UNTENAB LE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES LD. CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE ADDITION . 10. IN THIS CONNECTION LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE SYNOPSIS OF THE SUBMISSIONS WHICH READ AS UNDE R:- 1. APPELLANT PURCHASED A LAND IN BHOPAL JOINTLY W ITH ONE SMT. SWATI PALIWAL FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS. 2.00 CRORES (ASSESSEES SHARE BEING ONLY 1.00 CRORE) 2. THE SALE DEED IS AT PB PG. 67 WHEREBY THE NAMES OF PURCHASERS AND THE AMOUNT IS QUITE CLEAR. 3. IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE COPY OF BANK A/C AT SBI NAJAFGARH PLACED AT PB PG. 81 (RELEVANT PG. 85) TH AT THE AMOUNT WAS PAID TO THE SELLER THROUGH CHEQUE. 4. A CERTIFICATE IN THIS REGARD FROM THE BANK FROM WHERE THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE IS ALSO ENCLOSED AT PB PG. 87 . 5. AS REGARDS THE SOURCE OF MONEY COMING TO THE AC COUNT OF THE ASSESSEE THE SAME CAME FROM THE ACCOUNT OF SH. MAHENDER PAL PALIWAL THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE. - CONFIRMATION FROM MAHENDER PAL PALIWAL IS AT PB P G. 92. ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 8 - BANK A/C OF MAHENDER PAL PALIWAL IS PLACED AT PB PG. 93 (RELEVANT PG. 103) WHERE THE DEBIT IS APPEARING. - ITR OF MAHENDER PAL PALIWAL FOR VARIOUS YEARS ARE PLACED AT PB PG. 105-109. - FURTHER THE CONFIRMATION FROM TIRUPAT CONSTRUCTIO NS CO. REGARDING THE SOURCE OF MONEY IN THE ACCOUNT OF MAH NDER PAL PALIWAL IS PLACED AT PB PG. 110. 6. THE AFFIDAVIT OF CO-OWNER SMT. SWATI PALIWAL IS ENCLOSED AT PB PG. 116. 7. ALL EVIDENCES REGARDING THE SOURCE OF MONEY IN T HE HANDS OF SMT. SWATI PALIWAL IS ENCLOSED. - DETAILED NOTE ON SOURCE PB PG. 118. - AWARD OF COMPENSATION FROM WHERE MONEY HAS COME PB PG. 120-140. - BANK A/C AT PB PG. 141-143. - BANK CERTIFICATES AT PG. 144-145. 8. REGARDING THE STAMP DUTY CHARGES AMOUNTING TO RS . 14 60 000/- IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME CAME FROM THE REGULAR CASH ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. ALL THE ABOVE FACTS HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE CIT (A) IN GREAT DETAIL IN HIS ORDER AT PG. 5 PARA 4.3 ONWARDS (ADJUDICATION AT PG. 7 PARA 4.5). 11. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ABOVE. WE FIN D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY EXPLAINED THAT THE SAID PROPER TY WAS PURCHASED BY ASSESSEE JOINTLY WITH SMT. SWATI PALIWAL WITH E ACH OF THEM MADE AN INVESTMENT OF RS. 1 CRORE. THE ASSESSEE HAS DUL Y EXPLAINED THAT ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 9 SHE HAS PAID HER SHARE OF RS. 1 CRORE FOR PURCHASE OF LAND THROUGH HER BANK ACCOUNT. FURTHERMORE IT HAS BEEN DULY EX PLAINED THAT OTHER EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF STAMP DUTY AND REGIST RAR FEES WAS SHARED 50:50 BY HER ALONG WITH CO PURCHASER SMT. SW ATI PALIWAL. AS REGARDS THE SOURCE THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY EXPLAINED THAT SHE HAD TAKEN A LOAN OF RS. 1 CRORE FROM HER HUSBAND SH. MA HENDER PAL PALIWAL BY TRANSFER FROM HIS ACCOUNT. THE ORIGINA L SOURCE OF MONEY IN THE HANDS OF THE FAMILY OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS SMT. SWATI PALIWAL WAS AMOUNT RECEIVED AS COMPENSATION ON ACCO UNT OF ACQUISITION OF LAND BY THE GOVERNMENT. IN THESE C IRCUMSTANCES WE FIND OURSELVES IN AGREEMENT WITH THE LD. CIT(A) TH AT ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED ALL THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS AND VERACITY OF THE SOURCE OF INVESTM ENT. HENCE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO IN THIS REGARD ARE NOT AT ALL SUSTAINABLE. HENCE WE AFFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BY WHI CH ADDITION IN THIS REGARD HAS BEEN DELETED. 12. APROPOS THE INCOME OF RS. 1 LAC BEING AGRICULTU RAL INCOME. ON THIS ISSUE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN A SUM OF RS. 1 LA KH AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THIS CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE W AS DENIED BY THE LD. AO. THIS INCOME WAS TREATED BY THE LD. AO AS IN COME FROM OTHER SOURCES AS THE LD. AO NOTED THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT D ECLARE THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND. IN THIS REGARD LD. CIT(A) HAS NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A COPY OF OWNERSHIP OF AGRIC ULTURAL LAND AND EARNING OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE ASSESSEE FUR THER SUBMITTED THAT SHE HAS BEEN EARNING AGRICULTURAL INCOME REGU LARLY AND SHE HAD ALSO DECLARED THE SAME IN THE ASSTT. YEAR 2005- 06 2006-07 AND 2007-08 WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IN THESE ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 10 CIRCUMSTANCES LD. CIT(A) HAS HELD THAT HE WAS OF T HE OPINION THAT LD. AO HAS MADE A MISTAKE BY ASSESSING AN AGRICULTU RAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 1 LAKH UNDER THE HE AD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. WE FIND THAT THE ABOVE ORDER OF TH E LD. CIT(A) IS VERY COGENT AND REASONABLE. ASSESSEE HAS DULY ESTA BLISHED THE OWNERSHIP OF LAND. SHE ALSO RETURNED AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN THE EARLIER PERIOD WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEP ARTMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. HENCE WE UPHOLD T HE SAME. 13. APROPOS ADDITION OF INTEREST OF RS. 5.50 LACS IN THIS REGARD ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED INTEREST INC OME ON FDR AMOUNTING TO RS. 3 43 026/-. LD. CIT(A) NOTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED COMPLETE DETAILS OF FDRS ALONG WITH INTER EST THEREON AND TDS DEDUCTED COPIES OF FORM NO. 16A WAS ALSO ENCLO SED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES LD. CIT(A) HELD THAT ADHOC ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. AO BY MENTIONING THAT THE VALUE OF PRINCIPAL AMOUNT INVESTED IN FDRS IS NOT DISCLOSED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF DETAILS THE INTEREST INCOME IS TAKEN AT RS. 5.50 LACS AS AGAINST RS. 3 43 026/- IS NOT TENABLE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES LD. CIT(A) HAS DE LETED THE ADDITION AND RESTRICTED THE SAME TO RS. 3 43 026/- WHICH HAS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. 14. WE FIND THAT THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS QUITE CONVINCING AND REASONABLE. ASSESSEE HAS DULY SUBM ITTED THE ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 11 DETAILS OF INTEREST EARNED. HENCE THERE IS NO INF IRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION. 15. APROPOS DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 2 LAC ON AC COUNT OF CAPITAL GAIN ON THIS ISSUE LD. AO HAD ESTIMATED THE CAPITAL GA IN OF RS. 2 LAC IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. WITH REGARD TO THE A BOVE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT SHE HAD DE ALT WITH THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF THE SHARES DURING THE YEAR UND ER CONSIDERATION. THE DETAILS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES WERE FILED ALONGWITH RETURN OF INCOME AND THE ASSESSEE HAD INC URRED A LOSS OF RS. 39 375/- IN THESE TRANSACTIONS. THESE WERE DEC LARED IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME. SINCE THIS LOSS WAS NOT ADJ USTABLE UNDER ANY OTHER HEAD BEING SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS THERE FORE THE INCOME UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN WAS TAKEN AT NIL. I N THIS REGARD ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) TH AT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS SHE HAD FILED THE DETAILS O F INCOME AND COPY OF DATE-WISE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE BROKER M/S ALANKIT ASSIGNMENTS LTD. SHE CONTENDED THAT THE LD. AO DI D NOT FIND ANY FAULT IN THE ACCOUNTS. LD. AO ALSO DID NOT MAKE AN Y ENQUIRY INTO THESE TRANSACTIONS AND ESTIMATED THE INCOME UNDER T HE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN AT RS. 2 LACS. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANC ES LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION IN THIS REGARD. ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 12 16. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) PROPERLY TAKEN INTO AC COUNT THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE DETAILS OF SHARE TRANSACTIONS MADE BY HER AND LD. AO HAS NOT FOUND ANY FAULT THEREIN. HE HAS MERELY ESTIMATED THE INC OME IN THIS REGARD AT RS. 2 LACS DEVOID OF ANY BASIS. IN THES E CIRCUMSTANCES WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY WE AFFIRM THE SAME. 17. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/10/2013. SD/- SD/- [ [[ [R.P. TOLANI R.P. TOLANI R.P. TOLANI R.P. TOLANI] ]] ] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE 31/10/2013 SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR SRBHATNAGAR COPY COPY COPY COPY FORWARDED TO: FORWARDED TO: FORWARDED TO: FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI BENCHES ITA NO. 2051/DEL/2012 13