The ITO, Ward-14(4),, Ahmedabad v. Smt. Kiranben B.Gohil, Ahmedabad

ITA 537/AHD/2013 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 53720514 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AEBPG3400M
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 537/AHD/2013
Duration Of Justice 7 month(s) 12 day(s)
Appellant The ITO, Ward-14(4),, Ahmedabad
Respondent Smt. Kiranben B.Gohil, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 11-10-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 23-08-2013
Next Hearing Date 23-08-2013
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 28-02-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH AHMADABAD BEFORE SHRI D.K.TYAGI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. MEENA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 537/AHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009-10 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 14(2) AHMEDABAD. V/S . SMT. KIRANBEN B. GOHIL BHAGWATI VIDHYALAY HIRAWADI ROAD BAPUNAGAR AHMEDABAD. PAN NO. A EBPG3400M (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) BY APPELLANT SHRI P. L. KUREEL SR. D.R. /BY RESPONDENT SHRI PRITESH SHAH A.R. /DATE OF HEARING 23.08.2013 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11.10.2013 O R D E R PER : SHRI T.R.MEENA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF REVENUE WHICH HA S EMANATED FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-XXI AHMEDABAD DATED 10.12.201 2 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST DELE TING THE ADDITION MADE U/S. 68 OF THE IT ACT FOR RS. 50.2 LACS. 2. THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN LOAN F ROM FOLLOWING PERSONS: SR. NO. NAME & ADDRESS AMOUNT RECEIVED ( A ) RAJENDRA B. PATE L 145000/ - ITA NO. 537/AHD/13 A.Y. 09-10 PAGE 2 (B) KRUSHANG V. BAROT N.K. CHOWK BAROTVAS KALOL DIST: GANDHINAGAR 50000/- (C) SHAILESHBHAI B. NAI JALSALPUR TA.: KADI DIST: MEHSANA 150000/- (D) ANANDIBEN V. BAROT N.K. CHOWK BAROTVAS KALOL DIST: GANDHINAGAR 75000/- (E) VINODBHAI BAROT N.K. CHOWK BAROTVAS KALOL DIST: GANDHINAGAR 50000/- (F) MAHESHBHAI P. NAI JALSALPUR TA.: KADI DIST: MEHSANA 50000/- (G) SHILPABEN M. NAI MAIN POST TA: KADI DIST: MEHSANA 100000/- (H) SUPER SERVICE 50000/- (I) BIPINBHAI PATEL \ 25000/- (J) LEENA INDRAVADAN 25000/- (K) VADILAL MULJIBHAI 50000/- 50000/- (L) GOVINDBHAI PARMAR JALSALPUR TA.: KADI DIST: MEHSANA 100000/- (M) ROHITBHAI M. PATEL JALSALPUR TA.; KADI DIST: MEHSANA 50000/- (N) GHANSHYAMBHAI R. SOLANKI 63/B HARIKRISHNA SOCIETY KADI KALOI ROOD TA. KADI. DIST: MEHSANA 100000/- (O) NITUL H. PATEL ROYAL FASHION JODHPUR ROAD S.G. HIGHWAY AHMEDABAD 750000/- 750000/- (P) KAMLESH M. THAKKAR LAXMINARAYAN SOCIETY NARANPURA AHMEDABAD 2700000/- THE A.O. HAD ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 133(6) IN CASE OF R AJENDRA B. PATEL KRUSHANG V. BAROT ANANDIBEN PATEL VINODBHAI BAROT ROHITBHAI M. PATEL NITUL H. PATEL KAMLESH N. THAKKAR ONLY NOTICE WAS SERVED ON RAJENDRA B. PATEL NOT OTHER CASH CREDITORS WHICH WERE RETURNED BACK TO THE A.O. THE A.O. GAVE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE A SSESSEE TO FILE THE LOAN ITA NO. 537/AHD/13 A.Y. 09-10 PAGE 3 CONFIRMATION AS WELL AS OTHER EVIDENCES TO PROVE TH E GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE CONFIRMATION W ITH NAME AND ADDRESS PAN NO. AND DETAILS OF TRANSACTION BEFORE THE A.O. IN CASE OF RAJENDRA B. PATEL. BUT IT WAS INFORMED IN REMAINING CASH CREDI TORS THAT THEIR ADDRESSES HAD CHANGED AND THE A.O. WAS REQUESTED TO INQUIRE D IRECTLY ON NEW ADDRESSES OF SHRI KRUSHANG V. BAROT ANANDIBEN V. BAROT VINODBHAI BAROT ROHITBHAI M. PATEL NITUL H. PATEL. BUT NO INQUIRY WAS CONDUCTED BY THE A.O. HE DID NOT SATISFY WITH THE EVIDENCES SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT FOR THESE CASH CREDITORS. THE LOAN CREDITOR IN THE NAME OF S HAILESHBHAI B. NAI IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE A.O. THAT HE HAD SALARY INCOME AND INFORMATION CALLED U/S. 133(6) WAS NOT FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO R EFERRED THE CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BEFORE ISSUING CHEQUE . IN CASE OF MAHESHBHAI P. NAI NOTICE U/S. 133(6) WAS SERVED AND THE APPEL LANT FILED CONFIRMATION ALONGWITH COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT BUT THE A.O. DID NOT FIND ANY CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE LENDER TO GIVE THE LOAN OF RS.50 000/- IN R ESPECT OF SHILPABEN M. NAI FOR RS. 1 LAC IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 133(6) THE AS SESSEE FILED CONFIRMATION COPY OF PAN AND DETAILS OF SALARY BUT THE A.O. DID NOT FIND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR. WITH REFERENCE TO GOVINDBHAI PARMAR FOR RS. 1LAC IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 133(6) THE CREDITOR HAS FILED CONFIRMA TION DETAIL OF SALARY AS WELL AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME AND COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT. S IMILARLY THE A.O. DID NOT FIND ANY CREDITWORTHINESS TO ADVANCE RS.1 LAC TO TH E ASSESSEE. IN CASE OF GHANSHYAMBHAI R. SOLANKI FOR RS. 1 LAC IDENTICAL F INDINGS WERE GIVEN BY THE A.O. IN CASE OF KAMLESH N. THAKKAR FOR RS. 27 LACS NOTICE U/S.133(6) WAS ITA NO. 537/AHD/13 A.Y. 09-10 PAGE 4 RETURNED BACK WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ELECTRIC TRANSFER OF FUND BUT A.O. WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH REGARD TO THE SOURC E OF LOAN AND IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR AND ITS CREDITWORTHINESS. THUS HE MADE A DDITION OF RS.52.7 LACS INCLUDING OTHER CASH CREDITORS. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE A.O. THE AS SESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHO HAD ALLOWED THE APPEAL BY OBSERVING THAT THE LOAN CREDITORS HAD FILED THE CONFIRMATION COPY OF PAN COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT AND SOURCE OF INCOME HAS BEEN EXPLAINED BY THE ASSE SSEE. EVEN RE-PAYMENT PARTLY HAD BEEN MADE DURING THE YEAR AND SUBSEQUENT YEAR. THE LD. CIT(A) HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HIS ONUS AND LD. A.O. HAD NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE CONTROVERTING THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. IN SOME OF CASES THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED INFORMATIO N/DETAILS BEFORE THE CIT(A) DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLANT PROCEEDING ON WHICH REMAND REPORT HAS BEEN CALLED FOR FROM THE A.O. UNDER RULE 46A OF THE IT RULE. AFTER CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT THE LD. CIT(A) DELET ED THE ADDITION. 4. NOW THE REVENUE IS BEFORE US. LD. SR. D.R. VEHE MENTLY RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE A.O. AT THE OUTSET LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED CONFIRMATION LE TTER COPY OF PAN COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT DETAILS OF THE INCOME OF THE CASH CRE DITORS EITHER BEFORE THE A.O. OR BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO HAD TAKEN REMAND REPORT FROM THE A.O. FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE H IM FROM THE A.O. AFTER ITA NO. 537/AHD/13 A.Y. 09-10 PAGE 5 CONSIDERING EVIDENCE THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED H IS ONUS TO PROVE THE LOANS ARE GENUINE. LD. SR. D.R. HAD NOT CONTROVERT ED THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE CIT(A). THUS WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED . THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 11.10.2013 SD/- SD/- ( D.K.TYAGI ) (T.R. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA ! ! ! ! '! '! '! '! / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. '(' ) * / CONCERNED CIT 4. *- / CIT (A) 5. !./ ) ) 12( / DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. /45 67 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ 8/ 1 ': ) 12( ;