ITO, New Delhi v. Sh. Prashant Dwivedi, New Delhi

ITA 4655/DEL/2009 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 465520114 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN ADDPD5093Q
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4655/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
Appellant ITO, New Delhi
Respondent Sh. Prashant Dwivedi, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 10-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted F
Tribunal Order Date 10-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 10-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 10-01-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 09-12-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `F: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI C.L.SETHI JUDICIAL MEMBER. I.T. A. NO.4655/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 INCOME-TAX OFFICER SH. PRASHANT DWIVEDI WARD 47(2) NEW DELHI. VS. C/O AJAY KUMAR JAIN ADVOCATE D-119 PREET VIHAR DELHI. PAN: ADDPD5093Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDE NT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI H.K. LAL SR. DR. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI K.P. GARG CA. O R D E R PER C.L. SETHI JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03 .09.2009 PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IN THE MATTER OF AN ASSESSMENT MADE UNDER SEC. 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T 1961 (THE ACT) BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST THE CIT(A)S ORDER IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.34 36 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT MADE IN MUTUAL FUND BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND HAVE CAREFULL Y PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. IN THIS CASE THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 29.08 2006 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.8 88 710/-. THE RETURN WAS ORIGINALLY PROCESSED UNDER SEC. 143(1) OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE UNDER SEC. 143(2) WAS ISSUED ON 28.07.2007 FIXING THE MATTER ON 06.09.2007. IT HAS BEEN OBSER VED BY THE AO THAT NONE FOR THE ASSESSEE ATTENDED ON THE DATE FIXED FOR HEA RING. THE AO AGAIN ISSUED NOTICES UNDER SEC. 143(2) ON VARIOUS DATES WHICH AL SO REMAINED UN-COMPLIED WITH. THE AO PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT. AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION IT WAS FOUND BY THE AO THA T THE ASSESSEE MADE INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND AMOUNTING TO RS.34 36 000 /-. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DETAILS OR PARTICULARS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE T HE AO TREATED THE INVESTMENT OF RS.34 36 000/- TO BE AN UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF TH E ASSESSEE AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND COMPLETED TH E ASSESSMENT. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEA L BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). 6. BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTE D THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A NON-RESIDENT INDIAN AND EMPLOYED WITH THE COMPANY REGISTERED AT SINGAPORE AND HAS BEEN RESIDING AT SINGAPORE SINCE DECEMBER 2006 TILL DATE. HE WAS EMPLOYED WITH M/S. PUNJ LLOYD LTD. N EW DELHI UPTO NOVEMBER 2006 BEFORE SHIFTING TO SINGAPORE AFTER RESIGNING AND STILL WORKING AT SINGAPORE. THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE FAIL ED TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE AO. IT WAS FURTHER MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE DIFFERENT INVESTMENTS IN MUTUAL FUNDS DURING THE YE AR IN HIS INDIVIDUAL NAME AS WELL AS JOINTLY WITH HIS WIFE EITHER THROUGH THE IR JOINT AS WELL AS INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTS AND THE SOURCE OF THESE INVESTMENTS ARE PR OPERLY EXPLAINED. IT WAS FURTHER POINTED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE LEARNED CIT(A) THAT ALL THE PAYMENTS MADE FOR INVESTMENTS IN MUTUAL FUND WERE D ULY REFLECTED IN BANK ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE. THE DETAILED CLARIFICATION OF ALL THE INVESTMENTS ALONG WITH THE COPIES OF BAN K STATEMENTS WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). SINCE ALL THES E DETAILS AND EXPLANATION WERE NOT FURNISHED BEFORE THE AO THE LEARNED CIT(A ) SENT THESE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO THE AO FOR HIS SCRUTINY AND TO SUBMIT REPORT ACCORDINGLY. THE AO THEN SUBMITTED THE REPORT STAT ING THEREIN AS UNDER:- THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THIS CASE WAS COMPLE TED U/S 144 AT THE TOTAL INCOME OF 43 48 710/- AGAINST DECL ARED INCOME BY ASSESSEE OF RS.8 88 710/- ON 30/12/2008 DUE TO N ON- APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS HIS A.R. AS T HE ASSESSEE HAD CHANGED HIS RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS OF GHAZIABAD (U .P.). ON CREATING DEMAND OF RS.19 24 000/- THE BANK ACCO UNT NUMBER SA5008 106225 OPERATING IN CITI BANK WAS ATT ACHED U/S 226(3) ON 19/02/2009 A BANK DRAFT OF RS.11 54 876/- WAS RECEIVED FROM THE BANK. SH. AJAY KR. JAIN ADVOCAT E APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND FILED APPLICATION U/S 154 FOR RECTIFYING THE MISTAKE REQUESTING TO DELETE ADDITIO NS MADE OF RS.34 60 000/- WHICH WERE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE A SSESSEE BY CHEQUES DURING THE YEAR CONSIDERATION. THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO GO IN A PPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) XXX NEW DELHI RATHER TO FILE APPL ICATION FOR RECTIFICATION. AS PER DETAILS FILED BY THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE ALL THE INVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN INVESTED BY CHEQUES ISSUED FR OM THE BANK WHERE SH. PRASHANT DIWEDI & SUJATA DIWEDI IS OPERAT ING JOINT ACCOUNT. THE ADDITIONS MADE OF RS.34 60 000/- IS ONLY ON AIR INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM COMPUTER SYSTEM. THERE I S NO OTHER INCOME WHICH HAS BEEN CONCEALED BY THE ASSESSEE. S ICNE THE ASSESSEE HAS GONE IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) PENA LTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1)(B) & 271(1)(C ) HAVE BEEN KE PT IN ABEYANCE TILL THE DISPOSAL OF APPEAL PENDING. 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE R EMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE AO THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITIO N OF RS.34 36 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUND BY HOLDING TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABLE TO EXPLAIN BEFORE HIM WITH NECESSARY AND SUFFI CIENT EVIDENCE THAT ALL THE INVESTMENTS MADE EITHER INDIVIDUALLY OR JOINTLY WIT H HIS WIFE WERE ACTUALLY MADE FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT BY CHEQUES AND THESE WER E FROM HIS DECLARED SOURCES OF INCOME. HENCE THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APP EAL BEFORE US. 8. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE REMAND REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE AO BEFORE THE CIT(A). IN THE REMAND REPORT IT HAS BEEN STAT ED BY THE AO THAT AS PER THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ALL THE INVESTME NTS HAVE BEEN MADE BY CHEQUES ISSUED FROM THE BANK WHERE THE ASSESSEE OR HIS WIFE WERE OPERATING JOINT ACCOUNT. IN THE LIGHT OF THE REMAND REPORT IT IS THUS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE INVESTMENTS IN THE MUTUAL FUNDS BY IS SUING CHEQUES FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED INDIVIDUALLY OR JOINTLY WIT H HIS WIFE. THE CIT(A) HAS ALSO GIVEN A CATEGORICAL FINDING THAT ALL THE D EPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WERE FROM THE ASSESSEES DECLARED SOURCES OF INCOM E. IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS SO FOUND BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND AS FOUND B Y THE AO FROM THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WE ARE INCLINED TO U PHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND WE UPHOLD HIS ORDER IN DELETING THE ADDI TION OF RS.34 36 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF INVESTMENT MADE IN MUTUAL FUNDS. 9. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. 10. THIS DECISION IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT I MMEDIATELY AFTER THE HEARING WAS OVER ON 10 TH JANUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- (G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA) (C.L. SETHI) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 10 TH JANUARY 2011. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR ITAT.