SHRI RAMANDEEP SINGH SIDHU , BATHINDA v. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(3), BATHINDA

ITA 311/ASR/2019 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2019 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 31120914 RSA 2019
Assessee PAN AOEPK2778M
Bench Amritsar
Appeal Number ITA 311/ASR/2019
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant SHRI RAMANDEEP SINGH SIDHU , BATHINDA
Respondent INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(3), BATHINDA
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 26-11-2019
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 26-11-2019
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 03-05-2019
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. A.L.SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.311 & 505/ASR/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 PAWAN KUMAR PROP. M/S DEVI DAYAL SOM NATH COTTON GINNING PRESSING AND OIL MILLS BHIKHI. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4) MANSA. [PAN:AOEPK 2778M] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. J. K. GUPT A (LD. ADV.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. CHARAN DASS (LD. DR) DATE OF HEARING: 26.11.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 26.11.2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY JM: BOTH THE APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE/AP PELLANT AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 19.03.2018 & 18.07. 2018 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-BATHINDA U/S 250(6) OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT). 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL I N ITA NO.311/ASR/2018. (1) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) BATHINDA ERRED IN U PHOLDING AN ADDITION OF RS.9 50 000/- BEING CASH CREDIT OF M/S DES RAJ SUKHDEV RAJ BHIKHI PARTICULARLY WHEN THE AMOUNT WA S RECEIVED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS AND THE PROPRIETOR OF THE FIRM SH. ITA NOS.311 & 505/ASR/ 2018 (A.Y.2014-15) PAWAN KUMAR PROP. VS. I TO 2 HARDEEP KUMAR DIED ON 06.06.2015 I.E. BEFORE THE AS SESSMENT FRAMED ON 23.12.2016. (2) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) BATHINDA ERRED IN UPHOL DING AN ADDITION OF RS.46 542/- ON ACCOUNT OF PREPAID INSUR ANCE. (3) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) BATHINDA SHOULD HAVE SE T OFF THE ADDITION OF PREPAID INSURANCE OF RS.46 542/- AGAINS T ADDITION OF CASH CREDIT OF RS.9 50 000/-. (4) THAT ANY OTHER RELIEF MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO WHOM IT IS FOUND ENTITLED AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOUR GROUNDS OF APPEAL OUT OF W HICH GROUND NO.4 IS FORMAL IN NATURE AND THE LD. COUNSEL O F THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS GROUND NO.2 & 3 THEREFORE THIS ORDER SH ALL BE RESTRICTED FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF GROUND NO.1 ONLY. 4. BY WAY OF GROUND NO.1 THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE ISSUE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) BATHINDA ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADD ITION OF RS.9 50 000/- BEING CASH CREDIT OF M/S DES RAJ SUKHDEV RA J BHIKHI PARTICULARLY WHEN THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED THROUGH BANK ING CHANNELS AND THE PROPRIETOR OF THE FIRM SH. HARDEEP KUMAR DIE D ON 06.06.2015 I.E. BEFORE THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED ON 23.12.2016 THEREFO RE COULD NOT BROUGHT TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFI CER DID NOT ACCEPT THE CREDITABILITY OF UNSECURE LOANS FROM FOUR PERSONS INCLUDING QUA M/S DES RAJ SUKHDEV RAJ BHIKHI FROM WHO M UNSECURED LOAN OF RS.9 50 000/- WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH STA NDS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE ASSESSEE HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE LEDGER ACCOUNT WHEREIN THE AMOUNT OF RS.9 50 000/- HAS BEEN SHOWN VID E CHEQUE NO. 299763 DATED 11.11.2013. FURTHER THE LEDGER ACCOU NT OF THE ITA NOS.311 & 505/ASR/ 2018 (A.Y.2014-15) PAWAN KUMAR PROP. VS. I TO 3 ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE INSTRUMENT NO.4064 DATED 11.11.2013 THE SAME AMOUNT OF RS.9 50 000/- DEPICTED AS CREDITED. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE SAID TRANSACTION HAS BEEN CARRIED THROUGH BANKING CHA NNELS. THERE IS NOTHING TO SUGGEST ANY ADVERSE MATERIAL AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED ITS ONUS BY SUBMITTING THE MODE OF TRANSACTIONS. EVEN IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT PROPRI ETOR OF THE FIRM M/S HARDEEP KUMAR HAS ALREADY DIED ON 6.06.2015 BEFOR E THE FRAMING OF THE ASSESSMENT DATED 23.12.2016. AS THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RAM NARAIN GOEL [224 ITR 180 (P&H)] VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 05.11.1996 OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF LOANS BECAUSE THAT COULD NOT BE SAID TO BE WITHIN HIS SPECIAL OR EXCLUSIVE KNOWLEDGE . HENCE CONSIDERING THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS THE TRANSACTION ROUTED THROUGH BAN KING CHANNEL WHICH HAS DULY BEEN REFLECTED IN THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE AS WELL M/S DES RAJ SUKHDEV RAJ BHIKHI THE ADDITION AS UPHELD BY THE LD. CIT WITHOUT ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL AGAINST THE AS SESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED CONSEQUENTLY THE SAME STANDS DELETED. 5. ITA NO.505/ASR/2018 THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE AFFIRMATION OF THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ON THE AMOUNT OF RS.9 50 000/- B EING CASH CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OF M/S DES RAJ SUKHDEV RAJ BHIKHI. AS WE HAV E ALREADY DELETED THE SAID ADDITION VIDE ORDER DATED 26 TH NOVEMBER 2019 IN ITA NO.311/ASR/2018. HENCE THE PENALTY CANNOT SURVIVE. ITA NOS.311 & 505/ASR/ 2018 (A.Y.2014-15) PAWAN KUMAR PROP. VS. I TO 4 6. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26/1 1/2019. SD/- SD/- (DR. A.L.SAINI) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED: 26/11/2019. /PK/ PS. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THEN CIT(APPEALS) 5. SR DR I.T.A.T. AMRITSAR 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER