Shri Lalbhai Motilal Dalal,HUF, Ahmedabad v. The Income tax Officer,Ward-7(2),, Ahmedabad

ITA 2291/AHD/2010 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 01-09-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 229120514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AACHD5955K
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 2291/AHD/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant Shri Lalbhai Motilal Dalal,HUF, Ahmedabad
Respondent The Income tax Officer,Ward-7(2),, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 01-09-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 01-09-2010
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 08-07-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI JM AND D. C. AGRAWAL AM) ITA NO.2211/AHD/2010 A. Y.: 2007-08 SHRI LALBHAI MOTILAL DALAL HUF 3 SANDHYA BUNGLOWS NR. NISHANT 1 OPP. BILESHWAR MAHADEV 132 RING ROAD SATELITE AHMEDABAD 380 015 VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7(2) AHMEDABAD PA NO. AACHD 5955 K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI R. C. SHAH AR ASSESSEE BY SHRI K. M. MAHESH DR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)- XXI AHMEDABAD DATED 14-05-2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND S: 1. THAT THE C. I. T. (APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIRMIN G THE ADDITION OF RS.40114 SIMPLY BY STATING THAT THE ASS ESSMENT IS HUNKY-DORY WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE STATE BANK OF INDIA WITH WHOM THE DEPOSIT WAS MADE HAD COMMITTED A MISTAKE IN ADOPTING THE WRONG AMOUNT OF INTEREST AT RS.154645 AND DEDUCTING T. D. S. OF RS.15774 THE REON AND STATING THE SAME IN THE ORIGINAL FORM NO.16A ISSUED BY THE BANK ON 12-4-2007 WHEN IN FACT ACTUAL INTEREST PAID /CREDITED WAS RS.114531 WHICH MISTAKE STOOD CLARIFIED VIDE CE RTIFICATE DT. 23-9-2009 ISSUED BY THE BANK AND FURNISHED TO T HE OFFICE OF THE A. O. IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER. IT IS THEREFO RE SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME BE CONSIDERED AND THAT THE ADDITION O F RS.40114 BE DELETED. 2. THAT THE C. I. T. (APPEALS) FURTHER ERRED IN TOT ALLY IGNORING THE REVISED TAX DEDUCTION CERTIFICATE IN F ORM NO.16A ISSUED BY THE BANK ON 19-11-2009 STATING THE CORREC T AMOUNT OF INTEREST AT RS.1145314 THOUGH THE COPY THEREOF WAS FURNISHED TO HIM. IT IS THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME BE CONSIDERED AND THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.4014 BE DELE TED. ITA NO.2291/AHD/2010 SHRI LALBHAI MOTILAL DALAL HUF VS ITO W -7(2) AHD 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND CONSIDERE D THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 3. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN FIXED DEPOSIT INTEREST OF RS.1 14 531/- IN HIS RETURN OF INCOME HOWEVER A S PER TDS CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BANK THE TOTAL AMOUNT CREDITED WAS R S.1 54 645/-. THE AO ISSUED SHOW CAUSE WHY THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.40 11 4/- SHOULD NOT BE ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE A BSENCE OF ANY REPLY FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE THE ADDITION OF RS.40 114/- WAS MADE. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) THAT T HE BANK HAS CLARIFIED THE MATTER BY GIVING THE ACTUAL AMOUNT OF THE INTER EST AND THAT CERTIFICATE WAS ALSO FILED BEFORE THE AO WHICH IS ALSO FILED AT THE APPELLATE STAGE AND THAT THE BANK VIDE FORM NO.16A DATED 19-11-2009 CLA RIFIED THE ABOVE ISSUE. THEREFORE THE ADDITION IS UNJUSTIFIED. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HOWEVER DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND LD. DR RELIED ON ORDER OF AO. 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.40 114/- IS CLEARLY UNJUSTIFIED. GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE SELF EXPLANATORY. THE BANKER HA S ISSUED ANOTHER TDS CERTIFICATE IN FORM NO.16A DATED 19-11-2009 WHEREBY IT HAS BEEN CLARIFIED THAT ACTUAL INTEREST PAID IS RS.1 14 531/ - . THE CERTIFICATE WAS FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERIT OF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE WITHOUT ANY REASONS. SINCE THE CERTIFICATE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ADVERSELY COMMENTED UPON BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) THEREFORE THE RE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO SUSTAIN THE ADDITION IN THE MATTER. THE DISCREPA NCY IF ANY IN THE FORM NO.16 HAS BEEN CLARIFIED BY STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ALL THE LETTERS ARE AVAILABLE ON RECORDS WHICH SUPPORT THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ITA NO.2291/AHD/2010 SHRI LALBHAI MOTILAL DALAL HUF VS ITO W -7(2) AHD 3 ADDITION IS CLEARLY UNJUSTIFIED. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DELETE THE ADDITION. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 01-09-2010 SD/- SD/- (D. C. AGRAWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 1-09-2010 LAKSHMIKANT/- 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 DY. REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD