Smt Md. Shakirunneisa, Bapatla v. The Income Tax Officer, Bapatla

ITA 86/VIZ/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 8625314 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN ALNPM0925G
Bench Visakhapatnam
Appeal Number ITA 86/VIZ/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant Smt Md. Shakirunneisa, Bapatla
Respondent The Income Tax Officer, Bapatla
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 17-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 17-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 15-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 15-03-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 10-02-2010
Judgment Text
ITA NO.86 /VIZAG/2010 - VIZAG PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.86/VIZAG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 SMT. MD. SHAKIRUNNISA BAPATLA INCOME-TAX OFFICER BAPATLA (APPELLANT) PAN: ALNPM0925G VS. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI C. KAMESWARA RAO RESPONDENT BY: SHRI D S SUNDER SINGH ORDER PER SHRI B. R. BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2009 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) GUNTUR AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS SIX GROUN DS ASSAILING THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A). AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LEARNE D A.R SUBMITTED THAT THEY ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE FOLLOWING TWO ISSUES ONLY:- A. ADDITION OF RS.4 38 000/- PERTAINING TO UNEXPL AINED BANK DEPOSITS. B. REDUCTION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. 3. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE CASE ARE DISCUSSED IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE DERIVES INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY MONEY LENDING A ND FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES. SHE FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.37 140/- AND AGRICUL TURAL INCOME OF RS.1 16 000/-. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS TAKEN UP F OR SCRUTINY. IT WAS NOTICED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING A BANK ACCOUNT WITH STATE BANK OF INDIA BAPATLA WHEREIN SHE HAD MADE DEPOSITS ITA NO.86 /VIZAG/2010 - VIZAG PAGE 2 OF 3 ON VARIOUS DATES AGGREGATING TO RS.4.88 LAKHS. WHE N ENQUIRED IT WAS STATED THAT THE SAID DEPOSITS WERE MADE OUT OF AGRI CULTURAL INCOME OF ALL OF HER FAMILY MEMBERS. HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE COULD NO T PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE IN THAT REGARD. THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING O PENING CASH BALANCE OF RS.50 000/-. ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALLO WED SET OFF OF RS.50 000/- AND ADDED THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.4 38 000/- TO TH E TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THE ASSESSEE HA D DECLARED AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.1 16 000/- FROM 7.77 ACRES OF LAND. S INCE NO PROOF WAS FURNISHED IN SUPPORT OF THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TH E ASSESSING OFFICER RESTRICTED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TO RS.80 000/-. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) BUT DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH HIM. HENCE THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND CARE FULLY PERUSED THE RECORD. WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS.4 38 000/- WE NO TICE THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE SAID ADDITION WITH THE FOL LOWING OBSERVATIONS:- 9. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT. THE BASIC SUBMISSION IS THAT THE DEPOSITS INTO THE APPELLANTS BANK ACCOUNT CONSISTS OF INCOME EARNED FROM AGRICUL TURE OUT OF LANDS OWNED BOTH BY HER AS WELL AS HER HUSBAND. IN THE FIRST PLACE NO PROOF HAS BEEN FILED TO SHOW THAT THE BAN K ACCOUNT WHICH IS HELD IN THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT ALONE IS ALSO USED TO DEPOSIT AMOUNTS WHICH ARE THE INCOME OF THE HUSBAND . AS POINTED OUT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN UNABLE TO SHOW THAT THE DEPOSITS IN THE ACCOUNT ARE FROM THE OUT OF THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME EARNED BY THE APPELLANT AND HER HUSBAND. BEFORE ME THE APPELLANT HAS NOW FILED COP IES OF SOME INVOICES TO SHOW SALE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE BY TH E APPELLANT. HOWEVER THESE ARE NOT CO-RELATABLE WITH THE DEPOSI TS MADE INTO THE ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS THE APPELLANT S ONUS TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCES OF THE CREDITS INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT. SHE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO EXPLAIN THESE DEPOSITS EXCEPT IN THE MOST BROAD TERMS. THE GENERAL EXPLANATION GIVEN BY HER CANNOT BE ACCE PTED IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CORROBORATING EVIDENCE. I THEREFORE UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRM THE A DDITION MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT. THUS IT HAS BEEN NOTICED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE HER EXPLANA TION THAT THE IMPUGNED ITA NO.86 /VIZAG/2010 - VIZAG PAGE 3 OF 3 DEPOSITS REPRESENT AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF ALL OF HE R FAMILY MEMBERS. BEFORE US ALSO NO EVIDENCE WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SUBST ANTIATE THIS EXPLANATION. HENCE WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE DECIS ION OF LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 5. THE NEXT ISSUE RELATES TO THE ESTIMATION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME AT RS.80 000/- ON 7.77 ACRES OF LAND AS AGAINST RS.1 16 000/- DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAID ESTIMATION ON NOT ICING THAT THE ESTIMATE SO MADE IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE INCOME RETURNED B Y THE ASSESSEE IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR. BEFORE US ALSO THE AS SESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO COMPEL US TO INTERFERE WITH THE DECISION OF LEARNED CIT(A). HENCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFE RE WITH THE DECISION OF LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE ALSO. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17.3.2011. SD/- SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) (B R BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PVV/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM DATE: 17 TH MARCH 2011 COPY TO 1 SMT. MD. SHAKIRUNNISA D.NO. 14-5-132 ISLAMPETA BAPATLA-522101 2 INCOME-TAX OFFICER BAPATLA 3 4. THE CIT GUNTUR THE CIT(A) GUNTUR 5 THE CIT(DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE) ITAT VISAK HAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM