ACIT, Noida v. Dr. Narendra Kumar Gupta, Noida

ITA 4039/DEL/2011 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 403920114 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN ACRPG3513H
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4039/DEL/2011
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, Noida
Respondent Dr. Narendra Kumar Gupta, Noida
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted H
Tribunal Order Date 11-11-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 05-09-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL ITA NO. 4039(DEL)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF DR . NARENDRA KUMAR GUPTA INCOME-TAX CIRCLE NOIDA. VS. A-45 SECTOR-26 NOIDA. PAN: ACRPG3513H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : DR. B.R.R. KUMAR SR.DR RESPONDENT BY : S HRI NARENDRA KUMAR GUPTA AR DATE OF HEA RING : 03.11.2011 DATE OF PRO NOUNCEMENT : 11.11.2011 ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : AM IN THIS APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (I) LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY HOL DING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE INVESTMENT IN M/S VIMCOM FINVE ST WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAD HIMSELF SHOWN INVESTMENT OF RS. 4.25 LAKH IN M/S PARIS FASHION PVT. LTD. THIS FACT IS ALSO EVIDENT FROM THE ENTRIES IN THE BANK STATEMENT. (II) LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY HOLD ING THAT SHRI VINOD AHUJA AND SHRI VIJAY AHUJA ARE THE SAME P ERSONS WHEREAS THE ADDRESSES ARE DIFFERENT. THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH ADVANCE HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE GIVEN IS ALSO DIFFE RENT. (III) LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY IGNO RING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD STATED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 2.50 LAKHS WAS GIVEN OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWAL MADE ON 07.1 2.2005 WHEREAS NO CONFIRMATION WAS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THIS WITHDRAWAL. ITA NO.4039(DEL)/2011 2 (IV) LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY HOLD ING THAT THE SOURCE OF CREDIT ENTRY OF RS. 4 97 000/- IS EXPL AINED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBMIT A NY DETAILS ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF BORROWINGS TAKEN AND REPAID DURIN G THE YEAR. LD. CIT(A) ALSO IGNORED THE FACT THAT THE ASSES SEE FAILED TO FURNISH THE EVIDENCES REGARDING SOURCE OF PAYME NTS MADE BY M/S G.G. CONSULTANTS AND ALSO THE RECEIPT OF MON EY IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT. 2. IN REGARD TO FIRST GROUND IT IS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN UP BENEFIT OF ONE DEBIT ENTRY OF RS. 4 25 000/- TWICE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ONE BY SHOWING IT AS INVESTMENT WITH M/S PARIS FASION PVT. LTD. (PARIS FOR SHORT) AND THEN BY SHOWING IT AS INVESTMENT WITH VIMCOM FINVEST PVT. LTD. (VIMCOM FOR SHORT) . THUS ADDITION OF RS. 4.25 LAKH HAS BEEN MADE. IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT INVESTMENT OF R S. 4.25 LAKH WAS MADE IN THE VIMCOM WHICH HAS BEEN DULY ACCOUNTED FOR BY THE LATTER. HOWEVER BY MISTAKE ENTRY WAS MADE IN THE NAME OF PARIS. IN ORDER TO EXPLAIN THE MISTAKE THE BANK STATEMENT AND CERTIFICATE FRO M VIMCOM WERE FURNISHED. INVESTMENTS WERE ALSO MADE IN PARIS. THE INVES TMENT STOOD AT RS. 27.09 LAKH AS ON 24.10.2005 AFTER TAKING IN TO ACCOUNT THE OPENING BALANCE OF RS. 16.30. IN THE LIGHT OF THIS EXPLANATION THE MATT ER WAS REMANDED TO THE TO THE AO. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE EXPLANATI ON WAS NOT TENABLE AS THE ENTRY OF RS. 4.25 LAKH INVESTED VIDE CHEQUE NO . 248658 DATED ITA NO.4039(DEL)/2011 3 24.10.2005 APPEARED IN THE NAME OF PARIS. FURTH ER ON GOING THROUGH THE DETAILS OF ASSETS FORMING PART OF THE BALANCE-SH EET IT WILL BE SEEN THAT A SUM OF RS. 1 82 000/- HAS BEEN SHOWN AGAINST TH E NAME OF VIMCOM. THE REPORT WAS FURNISHED TO THE ASSESSEE WHO SUBMIT TED THAT THE ERROR IS ONLY CLERICAL AND NO DOUBLE BENEFIT HAS BEEN TAKEN OF ONE DEBIT ENTRY. IN THE BANK PASS BOOK THE ENTRY HAS BEEN SHOWN AS DISB URSEMENT TO PARIS VIDE CHEQUE NO. 248658 BUT NO CREDIT HAS BEEN GI VEN TO THE PARIS. A CERTIFICATE IN THIS REGARD WAS ALSO PRODUCED FR OM THE BANK. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE A ND SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE HIM. HE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS RIGHTLY SHOWN INVESTMENT OF RS. 4.25 LAKH IN VIMCOM. TH E CHEQUE HAS BEEN REALIZED BY VIMCOM AND THUS THERE IS AN ERROR MADE BY THE BANK IN THE STATEMENT WHEN IT SHOWED THE PAYMENT TO PARIS. CONFIRMATION FROM THE BANK HAS ALSO BEEN BROUGHT ON THE RECORD WHICH IS PLACED ON PAGE NO. 15 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS. 4.25 LAKH HAS BEEN DELETED. 2.1 WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AN D SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE US. ON PERUSAL OF CONFIRMATION FROM THE O RIENTAL BANK IT IS SEEN THAT THE BANK CATEGORICALLY MENTIONED THAT THE SUM OF RS. 4.25 LAKH ITA NO.4039(DEL)/2011 4 DEBITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE ON 24.10. 2005 VIDE CHEQUE NO. 248658 HAS BEEN CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF VIMCO M. BUT BY MISTAKE THE WORD PARIS HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN STEAD OF VIMCOM. THE CERTIFICATE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE ERROR WAS MADE ON ACCOU NT OF WRONG ENTRY MADE BY THE BANK IN THE NAME OF PARIS. THERE IS NO DO UBLE UTILIZATION OF THE SAME CHEQUE. ACCORDINGLY THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS UPHELD. 3. GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 ARE AGAINST DELETION OF THE ADDITION OF RS. 2.5 LAKH. THE FACTS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF MONEY ADVANCED TO VINOD AHUJA. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE MONEY ADVANCED TO HIM WAS RECOVERED IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS. THE AS SESSEE ALSO FURNISHED A CONFIRMED LEDGER ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF ATESH CONSTRUCTION PROPRIETOR SHRI VIJAY KUMAR AHUJA. HE CONFIRMED RECEIPT OF R S. 3.00 LAKH BY CHEQUE. ON THE OTHER HAND THE ENTRY OF RS. 5 5 0 000/- WAS IN THE NAME OF VINOD AHUJA AND IT WAS STATED THAT THE MONEY HA D BEEN RECOVERED FROM HIM IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS. ACCORDINGLY IT WAS HELD THAT UNACCOUNTED MONEY OF RS. 5.50 LAKH WAS ADVANCED TO VINOD A HUJA. ITA NO.4039(DEL)/2011 5 3.1 THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WAS THAT THE NAME OF VINOD AHUJA WAS WRONGLY WRITT EN IN PLACE OF VIJAY AHUJA. THE BANK ACCOUNT ALSO CONFIRMS THAT THE MONEY WAS ADVANCED TO ATESH CONSTRUCTION WHICH HAS BEEN DULY CERTIFIED BY VIJAY AHUJA. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE EXPLANATION IS ONLY AN AFTERTHOUGHT. THE BALANC E-SHEET SHOWS THE NAME OF VINOD AHUJA. NO CONFIRMATION HAS BEEN FILED FROM THIS PARTY. BY FILING CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM VIJAY AHUJA THE ASSE SSEE HAS TRIED TO MISLEAD THE AO. THIS REPORT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE ASSESSEE . IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ERROR WAS ONLY A TYPING ERROR. ALL THE TR ANSACTIONS ARE THROUGH BANK. THE ADVANCE WAS GIVEN TO VIJAY AHUJA FOR REPA IRING WORK AND IT DULY REFLECTED IN THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS IS ALSO PROVED BY WAY OF CONFIRMATION LETTER. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CO NSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE HIM. IT IS MENT IONED THAT THE EVIDENCE CLARIFIES THAT THE PAYMENT WAS MADE TO SHRI VIJAY AHUJA. THE PAYMENT IS MADE THROUGH THE BANK AND THE SOURCE OF PAYMENT IS WELL EXPLAINED. THEREFORE THE ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED. 3.2 BEFORE US THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THE LD. COUNSEL RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEA LS). ON CONSIDERATION OF ITA NO.4039(DEL)/2011 6 RIVAL SUBMISSIONS IT IS SEEN THAT NO PERSON W ITH THE NAME OF VINOD AHUJA HAS BEEN FOUND TO WHOM THE MONEY IS STATED TO HA VE BEEN ADVANCED. THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT THE MONEY WAS ADVANCED TO VIJAY AHUJA. THIS EVIDENCE INCLUDES BANK STATEMENT. THEREFORE THE NAME HAS BEEN WRONGLY WRITTEN IN THE BOOKS AS VINOD AHUJA. ACCORDINGL Y WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) WHICH REQUIRES CORRECTION FROM OUR SIDE. 4. GROUND NO. 4 IS AGAINST DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 4 97 500/- STATED TO HAVE BEEN BORROWED FROM G.G. CONSULTANTS & SE RVICES PVT. LTD. IN THIS CONNECTION IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE ASS ESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE AN D SOURCE OF THE ENTRY. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SUM OF RS. 4 97 500/- WAS BORROWED FROM G.G. CONSULTANTS WHICH IS ASSESSED AT PAN-AABCG3667M. THE ASSESSEE HAS A REGULAR RUNNING ACCOUNT AND THE AFORESAID AMO UNT REPRESENTS THE CLOSING BALANCE. THE ASSESSEE HOLDS SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN THIS COMPANY. THE BALANCE-SHEET WAS ALSO PROVIDED WHICH SHOWED THE AFORESAID AMOUNT AS LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE. THE AO CONSIDERED THE FACTS. IT IS MENTIONED THAT WHILE THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THE ACCOUNT TO BE A RUNNING ACCOUNT THERE ITA NO.4039(DEL)/2011 7 IS ONLY ONE CREDIT ENTRY. THE SOURCE THEREOF HAS NOT BEEN PROVED. THEREFORE THE AMOUNT WAS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INC OME. 4.1 BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A DIRECTOR OF G.G. CONSULTANTS WITH WHICH HE HAD M AINTAINED A RUNNING ACCOUNT. THIS ACCOUNT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THERE ARE SEVEN DEBIT ENTRIES AND TWO CREDIT ENTRIES. TH E ACCOUNT SHOWED OPENING BALANCE OF RS. 3 22 500/- AND CLOSING BALANCE OF R S. 4 97 500/-. THE AUDITED BALANCE-SHEET OF THE COMPANY SHOWED THIS BALANCE. CONFIRMATION WAS ALSO FILED FROM THE COMPANY. THIS MATTER WAS ALSO REMANDED TO THE AO. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE CONFIRMATION FILED ONLY SHOWED THE CLOSING BALANCE AND OTHER TRANSACTIONS WERE NOT SHOWN. THE SOURCE OF TWO CREDITS HAVE NOT BEEN EXPLAINED. THIS REPORT WAS FURNIS HED TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DETAILED TR ANSACTIONS WITH THE G.G. CONSULTANTS WHICH HAVE BEEN DULY CONFIRMED BY IT. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT NATURE AND SOURCE LEADING TO CLOSING BALANCE OF RS. 4 97 50 0/- HAVE BEEN EXPLAINED. THEREFORE THE ADDITION WAS DELETED. ITA NO.4039(DEL)/2011 8 4.2 BEFORE US THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE FINDINGS O F THE AO IN PARAGRAPH NO. 5 WHICH HAVE BEEN SUMMARIZED BY US. THE LD. COUNSEL RELIED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN PARAGRAPH NO. 8.5 WHICH HAVE ALSO BEEN SUMMARIZED BY US. THE FACTUAL POSITION WHICH EMERGES IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS UNDERTAKEN A NUMBER OF TRANSACTION S WITH G.G. CONSULTANTS IN PAST AND IN THIS YEAR. THE DULY CONFIRMED AC COUNT SHOWS OPENING DEBIT BALANCE OF RS. 3 22 500/-. THERE ARE CREDITS OF RS. 6.00 LAKH AND RS. 4.50 LAKH ON 16.04.2005 AND 16.12.2005. THERE ARE SEVEN DEBITS IN THIS ACCOUNT. THE AMOUNT PAYABLE AT THE END OF THE YEAR IS RS. 4 97 500/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVED THE IDENTITY BY FURNISHING PAN . HE IS A DIRECTOR IN THE COMPANY AND THE COMPANY IS ASSESSED TO TAX THEREFO RE THE CREDITWORTHINESS IS PROVED. THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IS ALSO PROVED BY FILING CONFIRMATION LETTER. THEREFORE WE ARE OF THE VIE W THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED ITS BURDEN. THEREAFTER THE AO HAS N OT DONE ANYTHING TO REBUT THE EVIDENCE EVEN IN REMAND PROCEEDINGS. IN VI EW THEREOF IT IS HELD THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDI TION. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. SD/- SD/- (I.P. BANSAL) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 11/11/2011 SP SATIA ITA NO.4039(DEL)/2011 9 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. DR. NARENDRA KUMAR GUPTA NOIDA. 2. ACIT CIRCLE NOIDA. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. THE DR ITAT NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.