Dcit Cir 5 2 Kolkata Kolkata v. Shri Raja Ram Yadav Kolkata

C In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Kolkata Bench C Kolkata Before Shri N V Vasudevan Judicial Member And Shri Waseem Ahmed Accountant Member Ita No 392 Kol 2016 Assessment Year 2011 12 Dcit Circle 5 2 Aayakar Bhawan P 7 Chowringhee Square 8 Th Floor Kolkata 69 V S Shri Raja Ramyadav 285 R B C Road Kolkata 28 Pan No Aalpy 7848 K Appellant Respondent By Appellant Shri David Z Chawngthu Addl Cit Sr Dr By Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah Ar Date Of Hearing 09 11 2017 Date Of Pronouncement 15 12 2017 O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed Accountant Member This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals 2 Kolkata Dat Ed 04 12 2015 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011 12 Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds 1 That The Ld Cit A Has Erred In Deleting The A Ddition Of Unexplained Investment Of Rs 1 15 91 080 Though The Same Is N Ot Reflected Under The Head Investment Of The Assessee In His Balance Sheet And The Assessee Failed To Offer Any Plausible Explanation Regarding The Said Investment The Onus To Substantiate Its Claim Lies With Assessee Which The Assessee Failed To Justify 2 That The Ld Cit A Has Erred In Treating The In Vestment Under The Head Other Current Asset Though The Meaning Of Other Current Asset Does Not Include Investment Ita No 392 Kol 2016 A Y 2011 12 Dcit Cir 5 2 Kol Vs Sh R Ram Yadav Page 2 3 That Thee Ld Cit A Has Erred In Deleting The A Ddition Of Unexplained Income Of Rs 5 83 565 Though As Penalty The Natur E Of Income It Comes Under The Purview Of Income From Other Sourc Es In Which It Has Not Been Shown The Interest From Bank Under No Circumstances Is Business Income Of The Assessee Since The Assessee Is Not Engaged In The Business Of Money Lending Or Non Banking Financ Ial Activities 4 That Your Petitioner Doth Hereby Craves Leave Of Furnishing Additional Grounds And Deletion Or Modifications Of Any Of T He Grounds Set Forth Above On Or Before The Final Date Of Hearing Of Th Is Appeal Petition 2 First Issue Raised By Revenue In Ground No 1 2 Is That Ld Cit A Erred In Deleting The Addition Made By The Assessin G Officer For 1 15 91 080 On Account Of Undisclosed Investment U S 69 B Of T He Act 3 Briefly Stated Facts Are That Assessee Is An Ind Ividual And Engaged In Business Of Indian Made Foreign Liquor Trading Of Marble And Construction Business The Assessee Was Running His Business Und Er Three Proprietorship Concerns Namely M S United Trading Co M S United Marble And M S United Construction The Assessee In His Balance Sheet Has Shown Following Investments M S United Trading Co Fixed Deposit With Hdfc Rs 1 12 58 913 Fixed Deposit With Bank Of Baroda Rs 2 00 000 Accrued Interest On Fd Rs 6 601 Rs 1 1 4 65 514 M S United Construction Deposits With Nsc Rs 1 15 566 Deposits With Sahara India Rs 10 000 Reliance Rs 98 000 Rs 2 23 566 Total Investment Rs 1 16 89 080 However During The Course Of Assessment Proceeding S Ao Observed That The Amount Of Investment Shown By Assessee In His Incom E Tax Return Is Of 98 000 00 Only Thus The Difference Of 1 15 91 080 11689080 98 000 Was Observed Which Assessee Failed To Explain On Th E Basis Of Any Ita No 392 Kol 2016 A Y 2011 12 Dcit Cir 5 2 Kol Vs Sh R Ram Yadav Page 3 Documentary Evidence Therefore Ao Treated The Sam E As Undisclosed Investment U S 69 B Of The Act And Added To The Tot Al Income Of Assessee 4 Aggrieved Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before L D Cit A The Assessee Before Ld Cit A Submitted That The Amoun T Of Investment Was Shown In Column No Iv Of The I T Return I E Other Current Asset For 1 42 11 080 Therefore There Is No Difference Betw Een The Amount Of Investment Shown By The Assessee In His Audited Fin Ancial Statement Vis Vis In The Income Tax Return Ld Cit A After Consider Ing The Submissions Of Assessee Deleted The Addition Made By Ao Ob Observi Ng A Under 2 2 I Have Duly Considered The Submission Of The A Ssessee And Verified The Return In Itr 4 And The Audited Balanc E Sheets And The Contention Of The Assessee Is Found Correct In Itr 4 The Assessee Has Shown Investment Of Rs 98 000 In Column 2 C Part A Bs Pertains To Investment In The Shares Of Reliance The Assessee Has Also Shown Other Current Assets Of Rs 1 42 11 080 In Column 3 Iv Part A Bs Of The Itr 4 Which Included I Fixed Deposits With H Dfc Of Rs 1 12 58 913 Ii Fixed Deposit With Bank Of Ba Roda Of Rs 2 00 000 Iii Accrued Interest On Fds Of Rs 6 601 All Th Ese Entries Are Shown In The Audited Balance Sheet Of The Proprietary Concer N M S United Trading Co And Iv Deposits With Nsc Of Rs 1 15 566 Ii Deposits With Sahara India Of Rs 10 000 Both Entries Are Reflec Ted In The Balance Sheet Of Another Proprietry Concern M S United Cons Truction In Fact The Ao Himself Accepted That All These Entries We R Eflected In The Balance Sheet Of Two Proprietary Concerns As Can B E Seen From His Order This Being The Issue Impugned Order Find Th At The Ao Has Made A Mountain Out Of A Molehill Without Proper Analyzi Ng Of The Entries In The Return In Any Case Making Addition By Compari Ng Assessees Own Return With Assessees Own Balance Sheeted Is Absur D As Stated There Was No Unexplained Investment As Such The Addition Of Rs 1 15 94 080 Is Therefore Deleted The Revenue Being Aggrieved Is In Appeal Before U S 5 Ld Dr Before Us Submitted That All The Necessar Y Details Are Not Filed Before Ao So The Matter May Be Restored To The File Of Ao For Fresh Adjudication He Vehemently Relied On The Order Of Ao On The Other Hand Ld Ar Filed Paper Book Which Is Running Pages From 1 To 78 And Demonstrated That The Amount Of 98 000 Was Shown Under The Head Investment With The Income Tax Return Whereas In The Balance Amount Of Ita No 392 Kol 2016 A Y 2011 12 Dcit Cir 5 2 Kol Vs Sh R Ram Yadav Page 4 Investment Was Shown Under The Head Current Asset At 1 42 11 080 In Support Ld Ar Further Provided The Break Up Of Cur Rent Asset Which Reads As Under Bs 3 Iv Other Current Assets United Trading Co 11 465 514 00 United Marble United Construction 2 745 566 00 14 211 080 00 Ld Ar Relied On The Order Of Ld Cit A In Rejoinder The Ld Dr Requested The Bench To Rest Ore The Matter To The File Of Ao With Specific Direction For Better Appreciation Of The Facts 6 We Have Heard The Rival Contentions Of Both The Side And Perused The Material Available On Record The Addition Made By Ao Merely On The Basis Of Difference Observed By Him Between The Amount Of In Vestment Shown By The Assessee In The Audited Financial Statement Vis A V Is In The It Returns However We Note That The Assessee Has Shown A Sum Of 98 000 In The Balance Sheet Under The Head Investment And The Rem Aining Investment Was Shown Under The Head Current Asset Thus It Cannot Be Concluded That The Assessee Has Made Unexplained Investment U S 69 B Of The Act Thus We Do Not Find Any Infirmity In The Order Of Ld Cit A Consequently We Uphold The Same Hence This Ground Of Revenue Is Dismissed 7 Next Issue Raised By Revenue In Ground No 3 Is T Hat Ld Cit A Erred In Deleting The Addition Made By Ao For 5 83 655 On Account Of Unexplained Income 8 The Ao During The Course Of Assessment Proceedin Gs Observed That Assessee Has Shown Interest Income Of 47 524 As Income From Other Source Whereas As Per Form 26 As Interest Income Ear Ned By The Assessee Is Of 8 251 And 6 22 798 On The Fixed Deposit Fd Made With The Bank Of Baroda And Hdfc Thus A Difference Of 5 83 565 Was Observed By Ao Which Was Treated As Undisclosed Income U S 69 A Of The Act And Added To The Total Income Of The Assessee Ita No 392 Kol 2016 A Y 2011 12 Dcit Cir 5 2 Kol Vs Sh R Ram Yadav Page 5 9 Aggrieved Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before L D Cit A The Assessee Before Ld Cit A Submitted That The Amoun T Of Interest Income For 6 31 050 Fd 622797 Bank Of Baroda Interest Of 82 502 Was Declared In The Profit And Loss Account Therefore No Additi On On Account Of Undisclosed Income On Interest Is Warranted Ld Cit A After C Onsidering The Submission Of Assessee Deleted The Same Made By Ao By Observin G As Under 3 2 Having Verifying The Return And The Audited Ba Lance Sheet Assessees Contention I Found To Be Correct In Fac T Assessee Credited Both Rs 47 524 Interest On Sba Cs And Rs 6 31 0 50 Interest On Fdrs Respectively In Columns No 5 C Part A Qd An D 2 D Part A P L In Itr 4 The Ao Made The Addition Without Checking The Figures Borne Out Of Return And Balance Sheet This Addition Of R S 5 83 655 Is Also Deleted The Revenue Being Aggrieved Is In Appeal Before U S 10 Before Us Both Parties Relied On The Order Of A Uthorities Below As Favourable To Them 11 At The Outset It Was Observed That The Interes T Income Of 6 31 050 Was Duly Disclosed In The Income Tax Return As Evid Ent From The Column No 3 Of Profit And Loss Account Which Placed On Page 11 Of The Paper Book In This Regard Ld Dr Failed To Bring Anything Contrary To The Finding Of Ld Cit A Thus We Do Not Find Any Infirmity In The Order Of L D Cit A Accordingly We Uphold The Same Consequently Ground Raised By Rev Enue Is Dismissed 12 Last Ground Of Revenue Is General In Nature And Does Not Require Any Separate Adjudication 13 In The Result Revenues Appeal Stands Dismissed Order Pronounced In The Open Court 15 12 2017 Sd Sd N V Vasudevan Waseem Ahmed Judicial Member Accountant Member Kolkata Dkp Sr P S 15 12 201 7 Ita No 392 Kol 2016 A Y 2011 12 Dcit Cir 5 2 Kol Vs Sh R Ram Yadav Page 6 Copy Of Order Forwarded To 1 Appellant Dcit Circle 5 2 Aayakar Bhawan P 7 C Howringhee Sq 8 Th Fl Kol 69 2 Respondent Shri Raja Ram Yadav 285 R B C Road K Ol 28 3 3 4 Concerned Cit Kolkata 4 4 Cit A Kolkata 5 7 3 3 Dr Itat Kolkata 6 Guard File By Order True Copy Sr Private Secretary Head Of Office Ddo 3