Shama Sood, v. ITO Ward 20 (4),

ITA 2498/DEL/2007 | 2002-2003
Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 249820114 RSA 2007
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2498/DEL/2007
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant Shama Sood,
Respondent ITO Ward 20 (4),
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 21-01-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 21-01-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 21-01-2010
Next Hearing Date 21-01-2010
Assessment Year 2002-2003
Appeal Filed On 18-05-2007
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIMAL GANDHI HONBLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2498/DEL/2007 A.Y. 2002-03 SMT. SHAMA SOOD VS. ITO WARD 20(4) 7 DR. MUKHERJEE NAGAR NEW DELHI 110 002 (WEST) DELHI (APPELLANT) ( RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. V.P SINGH ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SH. KISHORE B. SR. D.R. O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 24.1.2007 AND PERTAINS TO A.Y. 2002-20 03. THE GROUNDS RAISED READ AS UNDER. 1. THE LDCIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN ADDING THE AMOUNT OF GIFTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESEE OF RS. 2 02 00/- AS ITS UNEXPLAINED INCOME U/S 68 OF THE I.T.ACT. 2. THE LD.A.O. HAS ERRED IN ALW AND FACTS OF THE C ASE IN ADDING THE SUM OF RS. 10 100/- AS AMOUNT INCURRED FOR PAYI NG COMMISSION ETC. 2. IN THIS CASE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED FOLLOWING GIFTS OF RS. 1 01 00/- EACH FROM SHRI SAWAN KUMAR GOUR AND SHRI SUBHKARAN CHHAPARWAL. TH E ASSESSEE HAD 2 SUBMITTED AN AFFIDAVIT TO THE A.O. REGARDING THE GI FTS. THE A.O. REJECTED THE CLAIM BY HOLDING THAT THE SAID PERSONS DID NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY. THE A.O. HAD ALSO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE TH E SAID PERSONS. HOWEVER THE SAID PERSONS WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE A.O. THE AO PROCEEDED TO CONCLUDE THAT NONE OF THE DONORS WERE RELATED TO THE ASSESEE. THERE WAS ALSO NO SPECIFIC REASON OR OCCA SION FOR THE GIFTS. THE AO FURTHER HELD THAT JUST BEFORE GIVING GIFTS MONEY WAS DEPOSITED IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE SAID DONORS. HE FURTHER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT THESE PERSONS WERE FAMILIAR TO HE R. ACCORDINGLY HE ADDED A SUM OF RS. 2 02 000/- U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. HE ALSO ESTIMATED THAT IN ARRANGING THE SAID FUNDS THE ASSE SSEE WOULD HAVE SPENT 5% AS COMMISSION AND HENCE RS. 10 100/- WAS F URTHER ADDED. 3. UPON ASSESEES APPEAL THE LDCIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE A.O. THE CIT(A) INTER ALIA HELD THAT INSPITE OF THE REQ UISITE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD PROVIDED TO THE ASSESEE THE ASSESEE H AD FAILED TO AVAIL THE GIVEN OPPORTUNITIES. HE FURTHER MENTIONED THAT TH OUGH SUCH PERSONS WERE SAID TO BE INCOME TAX ASSESSEES BUT NO EVIDENC E WAS FILED WHETHER THEY ARE FILING INCOME TAX RETURNS OR NOT. HE FURT HER HELD THAT THE CAPACITY OF BOTH THE DONORS HAD ALSO NOT BEEN ESTAB LISHED. LASTLY HE HELD THAT THE ASSESEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE DONORS. AGAINST THIS ORDER THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3 4. LD.COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE US T HAT IT WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE DONORS WERE INDISPOSED AT THE TIM E WHEN THEY WERE REQUIRED TO BE PRESENT BEFORE THE A.O THEY COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE A.O. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED BEFORE US A LETTER D ATED 10 TH MARCH 2005 FROM THE DONOR ADDRESSED TO THE A.O. THAT THE SAID DONORS WERE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE AOS OFFICE AT DELHI AS DOCTORS AT GA UHATI HAD ADVISED THEM COMPLETE REST FOR THREE MONTHS. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE THE LD.COUNSEL PRAYED THAT THE DONORS ARE NOW AVAILABLE AND THE ASSESEE IS WILLING AND READY TO PRODUCE THEM FOR AOS ENQUIRY AND VERIFICATION. UPON HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY CO NSIDERING THE ABOVE IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE W ILL BE SERVED IF THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO CONSIDE R THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER EXAMINING THE DONORS AS THE ASSESEE HAD UNDERTAKEN TO PRODUCE THEM BEFORE HIM. ACCORDINGLY THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE FILE OF A.O. TO CONSIDER THE SAME AFRESH. NEEDLESS TO ADD ASSESEE SHOULD BE GRANTED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5 IN THE RESULT THE ASSESEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21ST JANUARY 2010 UPON CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING. (VIMAL GANDHI) (SHAMIM YAHYA) PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21ST JANUARY 2009 *MANGA 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A) 5.DR 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR // T RUE COPY //