ITO, New Delhi v. Sh. Sunil Kumar,, New Delhi

ITA 3998/DEL/2010 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 399820114 RSA 2010
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 3998/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant ITO, New Delhi
Respondent Sh. Sunil Kumar,, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 25-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 25-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 17-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 17-03-2011
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 27-08-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL I.T.A.NO.3998(DEL)/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 INCOME-TAX OFFICER SHR I SUNIL KUMAR WARD 24(3) NEW DELHI. VS. 20A GREEN MEADOWS FARM POST OFFICE SATBARI MEHRAULLI NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI KISHORE B. S R. DR RESPONDENT BY : SH RI ARUN KISHORE C.A. ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : AM THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN TWO GROUNDS IN THE APPEAL THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF WHICH IS-WHETHER THE LD. CIT(APPEALS ) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 14 46 500/- MADE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 69A OF THE ACT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE ASSESSEE F AILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE ASSESSMENT OR THE APPE LLATE PROCEEDINGS? 2. THE FACTS IN THIS REGARD ARE THAT THE AO EXT RACTED INFORMATION FROM DATA BASE THAT THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS. 14 46 500/- IN CASH IN HIS SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH ABN AMRO BANK. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS AND A SPECIFIC SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WAS ALSO ISSUED TO HIM IN THI S REGARD. THE ASSESSEE ITA NO. 3998(DEL)/2010 2 DID NOT EXPLAIN THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF DEPOSITS . THEREFORE THIS AMOUNT WAS INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME BY INVOKING THE P ROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 69A OF THE ACT. 3. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT( APPEALS)-XXIII NEW DELHI. GROUND NO. 3 TAKEN BEFORE HIM WAS AGAINS T THIS ADDITION AND IT WAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE EARNED IN COME OF RS. 55 95 800/- FROM TWO SOURCES. IN VIEW THEREOF THE AO SHO ULD HAVE ONLY ADDED THE PEAK CREDIT OR THE EXCESS CREDIT IF ANY. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DECIDED OTHER GROUNDS BUT DID NOT DEAL WITH THIS GROUN D SPECIFICALLY. HOWEVER IN PARAGRAPH NO. 9 IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE A SSESSEE SUCCEEDS IN RESPECT OF GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3. 4. BEFORE US THE CASE OF THE LD. DR IS THAT TH E MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DETERMINATION O F THIS ISSUE. THE CASE OF THE LD. COUNSEL IS THAT THIS GROUND STANDS IMPLI CITLY DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN VIEW OF THE FINDING RECORDED IN RESPECT OF GROUND NO. 2 WHICH IS TO THE EFFECT THAT THE INCOME OF THE AS SESSEE BROUGHT TO TAX WAS AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THUS THE ASSESSEE HAD ENOU GH MONEY IN HAND TO MAKE DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT IN CASH. ITA NO. 3998(DEL)/2010 3 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE US. THE REVENUE IS NOT IN APPEAL AGAINST THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN RESPECT OF THE NATURE OF INCOME E ARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER THE ORDER DOES NOT REVEAL THAT THE ASSES SEE HAD SUFFICIENT CASH BALANCES ON THE RESPECTIVE DATES OF DEPOSIT IN T HE BANK ACCOUNT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE TEND TO AGREE WITH THE LD. DR THAT THE MATTER IS REQUIRED TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR DECIDING GROUND NO. 3 BEFORE HIM BY WAY OF A DETAILED ORDER. NEEDLE SS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE AND THE AO SHALL BE GRANTED REASONABLE OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD IN THE MATTER. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS TREATED AS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 MARCH 2011. SD/- SD/- (C.L. SETHI) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF ORDER: 25TH MARCH 2011. SP SATIA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: MR. SUNIL KUMAR NEW DELHI. ITO WARD 24(3) NEW DELHI. CIT(A) CIT THE DR ITAT NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT REG ISTRAR.