Sanjeev Aggarwal, New Delhi v. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 3969/DEL/2009 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 05-03-2010 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 396920114 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN ADHPA0452G
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 3969/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
Appellant Sanjeev Aggarwal, New Delhi
Respondent ACIT, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 05-03-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 05-03-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 25-02-2010
Next Hearing Date 25-02-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 24-09-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 3965 TO 3970/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2000-01TO 2005-06 SANJEEV AGGARWAL 6068 GALI BATASHA KHARI BAOLI DELHI. ADHPA0452G VS. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17 NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : VIKAS K. GUPTA CA & N. GUPTA CA RESPONDENT BY: BANITA DEVI SR. DR O R D E R PER BENCH : ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE THEY ARE DIRECTED AGAINST SIX SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A) DATED 27 TH JULY 2009 IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEARS 2000-01 TO 2005-06. 2. THE COMMON ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS IS REGARDING ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LOWER HOUSEHOLD EXPENSE S WHICH IS SUSTAINED BY LD. CIT(A). THE AMOUNT INVOLVED IN RE SPECT OF EACH YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS AS FOLLOWS: - S.NO. A.Y. ADDITION SUSTAINED BY CIT(A) 1. 2000-01 96 000/- 2. 2001-02 96 000/- 3. 2002-03 1 06 000/- 4. 2003-04 1 47 720/- 5. 2004-05 1 39 690/- 6. 2005-06 1 57 260/- 2 ITA NOS. 3965 TO 3970/DEL/2009 APART FROM THE ABOVE ISSUE ONE MORE ISSUE INVOLVES IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 WHICH IS REGARDING ADDITION OF RS. 11 000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 3. SO AS IT RELATES TO LOW HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES INIT IALLY IN THE A.Y. 2000-01 THE AO HAS DISCUSSED THIS ISSUE IN PARA 3 O F HIS ORDER. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO JUSTIFY THE HOUSEHOLD EXPE NSES SHOWN BY HIM WHICH WAS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 24 000/- BY HIMSELF AN D RS. 30 000/- BY THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS NOTED BY THE AO THAT A SSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE WITHDRAWALS MADE BY HIS WIFE AND IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION THE AO HAS ESTIMATED THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AT A SUM OF RS. 1 20 000/- BY WRITING THAT THE SAME IS CONSIDERED REASONABLE SEEING THE SIZE AND STATUS OF THE FAMILY OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER GIVING RELIEF OF RS. 24 000/- SHOWN IN THE HA NDS OF THE ASSESSEE HE MADE NET ADDITION OF RS. 96 000/-. IT WAS SUBMITTE D BEFORE THAT ASSESSEE IS A SMALL TRADER LIVING IN A JOINT FAMILY WITH MOTHER BROTHER AND HIS FAMILY WITH A COMMON KITCHEN IN A HOUSE OWNED B Y HIS MOTHER. ALL THE FAMILY MEMBERS ARE MAKING CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT A DETAILED CHART W AS FURNISHED IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS SHOWING DRAWING MA DE BY EACH MEMBER OF THE FAMILY TOWARDS FAMILY EXPENSES. DURI NG THE YEAR TOTAL DRAWING WAS RS. 54 000/- OUT OF WHICH 24 000/- WAS CONTRIBUTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND RS. 30 000/- WAS CONTRIBUTED BY THE WI FE SMT. MONIKA AGGARWAL WHO IS ALSO AN INCOME TAX ASSESSEE. THE A SSESSEE HAS TWO CHILDREN AGED 7 YEARS AND 4 YEARS. THE AO DID NOT BRING ANY MATERIAL OR 3 ITA NOS. 3965 TO 3970/DEL/2009 EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO JUSTIFY THE ESTIMATION OF HOU SEHOLD EXPENSES OF RS. 1 20 000/- AND THUS IT WAS PLEADED THAT ADDITI ON SHOULD BE DELETED. CONSIDERING THESE SUBMISSIONS LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSER VED THAT NO CREDIT SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR WITHDRAWALS MAD E BY HIS WIFE AS WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO TO INCUR CERTAIN EXPE NDITURES. HE FOUND THAT AO HAS FAIRLY ESTIMATED THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENDIT URE IN WHICH NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR. HE ALSO TOOK NOTE TO T HE FACT THAT IN A.Y. 2006- 07 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS SHOWN HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES AT RS. 2.22 LAKH AND IN THIS MANNER THE ADDITION HAS BEEN SUSTAINED. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED HENCE IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE FACTS IN OTHER YEARS ARE SIMILAR EXCEPT THE DIFFERENCE IN QUANTUM OF ADDITION AND QUANTUM OF WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE E STIMATED EXPENSES AND WITHDRAWALS IN THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDE RATION CAN BE TABULATED AS UNDER: S.NO. A.Y. WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO 1. 2001-02 24 000 + 36 000 =60 000/- 96 000/- 2. 2002-03 27 000 + 39 100 =66 100/- 1 06 000/- 3. 2003-04 12 000 + 30 000 = 42 000/- 1 47 720/- 4. 2004-05 36 000 + 30 000 = 66 000/- 1 39 690/- 5. 2005-06 36 000 + 24 000 = 60 000/- 1 57 260/- 4. IT MAY BE MENTIONED THAT DURING AY 2005-06 THE A O HAD ALLOWED THE WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE AM OUNTING TO RS. 4 ITA NOS. 3965 TO 3970/DEL/2009 36 000/- AND NET ADDITION WAS MADE OF A SUM OF RS. 1 57 260/- WHICH HAS BEEN UPHELD BY LD. CIT(A). 5. RELYING ON THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BEFORE LD. CIT (A) IT WAS PLEADED BY LD. AR THAT ADDITION HAS WRONGLY BEEN MADE AND I S MADE SIMPLY ON THE BASIS OF CONJUNCTURES AND SURMISES. NO MATERIA L HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES OF THE AS SESSEE WERE IN ANY MANNER MORE THAN WHAT WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE. THUS IT WAS PLEADED THAT REQUIRED RELIEF MAY BE GI VEN. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND LD. DR PLEADED THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT JUSTIFY THE HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWAL MADE BY HIM VIS-A-VIS THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE MADE BY HIM AND THEREFORE THE AO WAS RIGHT IN ESTIMATING THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAS RIGH TLY MADE THE ADDITION WHICH HAS RIGHTLY BEEN SUSTAINED BY CIT(A) AND THE ORDER OF CIT(A) SHOULD BE UPHELD. 7. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO N IN THE LIGHT OF MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. IT IS TRUE THAT ASSESSE E COULD NOT JUSTIFY THE WITHDRAWALS MADE BY HIM AND HIS WIFE THAT THEY WERE SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE. AT THE SAME TIME THE AO HAS ALSO NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT WHAT WAS THE BASIS OF THE ESTIMATE. KEEPING IN VIEW THE ENTIRETY OF THE FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND ALSO KEEPING IN VIEW THAT WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE WHO IS AN INCOME TAX ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CONTRIBUTED TOWARDS HOUSEHOLD EXP ENSES WE ARE OF 5 ITA NOS. 3965 TO 3970/DEL/2009 THE OPINION THAT ASSESSEE DESERVES SOME RELIEF ON A CCOUNT OF ESTIMATION ACCORDINGLY WE GIVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE IN FOLLO WING MANNER IN EACH OF THE ASSESSEE: - S.NO. A.Y. ADDITION SUSTAINED BY CIT(A) RELIEF GIVEN TO ASSESSEE BY THIS ORDER ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE ORDER 1. 2000-01 96 000/- 48 000/- 48 000/- 2. 2001-02 96 000/- 48 000/- 48 000/- 3. 2002-03 1 06 000/- 53 000/- 53 000/- 4. 2003-04 1 47 720/- 74 000/- 73 720/- 5. 2004-05 1 39 690/- 70 000/- 69 690/- 6. 2005-06 1 57 260/- 80 000/- 77 260/- 8. THE AO WILL COMPUTE THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE I N RESPECT OF THESE YEARS IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. 9. IN THIS MANNER THE COMMON GROUND RAISED IN ALL T HE SIX APPEALS IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 10. NOW COMING TO THE GROUND NO. 2 IN RESPECT OF A. Y. 2004-05. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN DISCUSSED BY THE AO IN PARA 2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE AO IN ABSENCE OF DETAILS FILED IN THE SHAPE OF BANK ACCOUNT CAPITAL ACCOUNT ETC. ADDED A SUM OF RS. 1 LAKH. THE ADDITI ON WAS AGITATED IN THE APPEAL FIELD BEFORE CIT(A) AND FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IN TAMIL NADU MERCANTILE BANK LTD. FOUND THAT A SUM OF RS. 11 000/- WAS DEPOSITED IN CASH AN D OTHER AMOUNTS WERE FOUND TO BE ACCEPTABLE AND THUS LD. CIT(A) HA S UPHELD THE ADDITION OF RS. 11 000/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME WAS UNE XPLAINED DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED HENCE IN APPEAL. 6 ITA NOS. 3965 TO 3970/DEL/2009 11. ON THIS ISSUE AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES W E FOUND THAT A SUM OF RS. 11 000/- IS A SMALL AMOUNT WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE OUT OF HIS SAVINGS AT HOME ETC. THE S AID SUM CANNOT BE TREATED TO BE UNEXPLAINED SIMPLY FOR THE REASON THA T ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE EXACT SOURCE OF THE SAID DEPOSIT. WE S EE NO JUSTIFICATION IN UPHOLDING THE SAID ADDITION. WE DELETE THE SAME AN D GROUND NO. 2 OF THE A.Y. 2004-05 IS ALLOWED. 12. IN THE RESULT ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05.03.2010 (K.D. RANJAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (I.P. BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 05.03.2010 *KAVITA COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ITAT NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR