Puneet Gupta, Kanpur v. Income Tax Officer-2(3), Kanpur

ITA 222/LKW/2016 | 2012-2013
Pronouncement Date: 18-10-2016 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 22223714 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN ABSPG5515B
Bench Lucknow
Appeal Number ITA 222/LKW/2016
Duration Of Justice 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant Puneet Gupta, Kanpur
Respondent Income Tax Officer-2(3), Kanpur
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 18-10-2016
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 18-10-2016
Date Of Final Hearing 17-10-2016
Next Hearing Date 17-10-2016
Assessment Year 2012-2013
Appeal Filed On 02-05-2016
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH SMC LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P. K. BANSAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.222/LKW/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2012-2013 SHRI PUNEET GUPTA 113/131-A SWAROOP NAGAR KANPUR. PAN:ABSPG5515B VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(3) KANPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI MANOJ KUMAR RESPONDENT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM D. R. DATE OF HEARING 17/10/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 8 /10/2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-I KANPUR DATED 12/02/2016 RELATING TO ASSES SMENT YEAR 2012- 13. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL RELATES T O THE SUSTENANCE OF ADDITION OF RS.2 13 830/-. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS CAREFULLY CO NSIDERED THE SAME ALONG WITH THE ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW. I NOTED THAT IN THIS 2 CASE WHILE THE ASSESSEE WAS ON THE WAY FROM HIS RES IDENCE TO THE FACTORY DADA NAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE VIA IN-LAWS HOUSE TO ATTEND THE RITUAL OF HER MOTHER-IN-LAW AND ALSO TO DROP HIS FA MILY MEMBERS HIS CAR WAS INTERCEPTED AT JARIB CHOWKI CROSSING AND THE PO LICE FOUND A CASH OF RS.2 13 830/-. THE ASSESSEE IMMEDIATELY MENTIONED THAT THE MONEY BELONGS TO HIS FIRM M/S KAMAKHAYA INTERNATIONAL AND WAS BEING CARRIED BY HIM TO FACTORY FOR THE BUSINESS NEEDS IN ROUTINE COURSE. THE ASSESSEE SUBSEQUENTLY BEFORE THE ADI (INV.) KANPUR IN HIS S TATEMENT RECORDED ON OATH ON 09/01/2012 ALSO STATED THE SAME THING THAT THE MONEY BELONGS TO THE FIRM M/S KAMAKHAYA INTERNATIONAL AND HE CARR IES THE CASH IN THE EVENING TO HIS HOME AND WHILE IN THE MORNING HE BRI NGS BACK THE SAME TO THE FACTORY. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THE CO PY OF THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS AND THE COPY OF THE CASH BOOK FROM 01/12/2011 TO 09/01/2012 BEFORE THE ADI. THE ADI D ULY EXAMINED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND REFERRED THE MATTER TO THE CON CERNED INCOME TAX AUTHORITY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER STARTED THE INCOM E TAX PROCEEDINGS BUT IGNORED THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS TH E COPY OF THE CASH BOOK OF M/S KAMAKHAYA INTERNATIONAL WHICH PROVES TH AT M/S KAMAKHAYA INTERNATIONAL WAS HAVING THE SUFFICIENT CASH IN HAN D TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF RS.2 13 830/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER JUS T MADE THE ADDITION IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS DULY CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). IN MY VIEW THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY DISCHARGED HIS ONUS EXPLAINING THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF THE AMOUNT WHICH WAS SEIZED FR OM HIS CAR. ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE NATURE AND THE SOURC E THE ONUS GETS SHIFTED ON THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PROVE THAT THE CASH DOES NOT BELONG 3 TO THE FIRM M/S KAMAKHAYA INTERNATIONAL. NO SUCH E VIDENCE HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD. EVEN THE COPY OF THE CASH BOOK WAS DULY SUBMITTED BEFORE US IN THE PAPER BOOK ALONG WITH THE STATEMEN T OF THE ASSESSEE RECORDED U/S 131 OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THIS FACT I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.2 13 830/-. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18/10/2016) SD/. ( P. K. BANSAL ) ACCOUNTANT M EMBER DATED:18/10/2016 *SINGH COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR