Shri Mohit Bansal, JODHPUR v. DCIT, JODHPUR

ITA 440/JODH/2010 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 04-10-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 44023314 RSA 2010
Bench Jodhpur
Appeal Number ITA 440/JODH/2010
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant Shri Mohit Bansal, JODHPUR
Respondent DCIT, JODHPUR
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-10-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 04-10-2010
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 19-07-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 440/JU/2010 ASSTT. YEAR : 2008-09 SHRI MOHIT BANSAL VS DY. C.I.T. CIRCLE-2 JODHPUR. JODHPUR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI AMIT KOTHARI A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T.C. GUPTA D.R. ORDER PER JOGINDER SINGH J.M.: 1 . THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) DATED 9-6-2010 ON THE GROUND THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD CIT (A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE AD DITION OF RS. 1 94 000/- AS ALLEGED INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AS NO DONATION WA S CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE . 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL WE HAVE HEARD SHRI AMIT KOTHARI LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI T.C. GUPTA LD. D .R. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED BY FURTHER SUBMITTING THAT THE LD. DCIT. HAD ALREADY MADE A DISALLOWANCE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80 G OF THE ACT FOR DONATION OF RS.92 000/- AS THE ASSESSEE 2 DUE TO OVERSIGHT CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80 G WHILE F ILING THE E-RETURN FOR THE FIRST TIME. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT EVEN THE ASSESSE E IS READY TO FILE AN AFFIDAVIT THAT NO DONATION WAS MADE TO ANY PERSON. ON THE OT HER HAND THE LD. D.R. THOUGH DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER BUT FAIRLY CONTE NDED THAT KEEPING IN VIEW THE OVER ALL FACTS IT NEEDS RE-EXAMINATION. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE FILE. IT IS SEEN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT EVEN THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS MENTIONED THAT THE LD . ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN INFERRING THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE THE P AYMENT OF RS.1 94 000/- OUT OF UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. HOWEVER THERE IS NO MENTI ON TO WHOM THIS PAYMENT WAS MADE. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ON ENQUIRY F OUND THAT NO WITHDRAWAL WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE OF THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT FRO M ANY BANK ACCOUNT. HOWEVER THE ASSERTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE IS THAT SINCE NO DONATION WAS MADE TO ANY PERSON THEN WHERE IS THE Q UESTION OF WITHDRAWAL OR CASH IN HAND FOR MAKING SUCH DONATION. AS THE F ACTS ARE NOT CLEAR FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS FROM THE IMPUGNED O RDER AS TO WHOM THE DONATION WAS MADE THEREFORE KEEPING IN VIEW THE AR GUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LD. RESPECTIVE COUNSEL AND WITHOUT GOING INTO T HE MERITS OF THE CASE WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT RE-EXAMINATION OF THE FACTS IS REQUIRED CONSEQUENTLY WE REMAND THIS FILE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSIN G OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION / RE-EXAMINATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH L AW. NEEDLESS TO MENTION HERE THAT THE ASSESSEE BE PROVIDED DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WITH FURTHER LIBERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE IF ANY TO SU BSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. FINALLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDED AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 4 TH OCTOBER 2010. SD/- SD/- (K.G. BANSAL) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMB ER DATED: 4TH OCTOBER 2010 KAMAL LIST FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON (AM) (JM) COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. INCOME-TAX OFFICER 4. CIT 5. D/R 6. GUARD FILE