Shri Balchand Jain v. The Acit 1 1

1 In The Income Tax Appelate Tribunal Indore Bench Indore Before Shri Joginder Singh And Shri V K Gupta Am Ita Nos 77 To 80 Ind 08 A Ys 2000 01 2001 02 2002 03 2004 05 Balchand Jain Dk 1 71 Danish Kunj Kolar Road Bhopal Appellant Pan Acwpj 0803 E Vs Asstt Commr Of Incometax 1 1 Bhopal Respondent Ita No 75 Ind 08 A Y 2005 06 Jitendra Kumar Jain Dk 1 71 Danish Kunj Kolar Road Bhopal Appellant Pan Afapj 6759 G Vs Asstt Commr Of Incometax 1 1 Bhopal Respondent Appellants By S Shri H P Verma And Shri Ashish Goy Al Respondent By Shri K K Singh Cit Dr O R D E R Per Joginder Singh Jm These Appeals Are By The Revenue For Different Ass Essment Years Challenging The Order Of The Learned Cit A Dated 1 7 12 2007 And 2 19 3 2008 Respectively In The Case Balchand Jain Ita Nos 77 To 80 Ind 08 Following Common Grounds Have Been Rais Ed 1 That On The Facts And In The Circumstances Of The C Ase The Learned Cit A Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs 55 898 Out Of Total Addition Of Rs 85 898 A Ssessment Year 2000 01 Rs 61 898 Out Of Total Addition Of Rs 91 898 Assessment Year 2001 02 Rs 67 898 Out Of Total Addition Of Rs 1 17 898 A Y 2002 03 And Rs 23 081 Out Of Total Addition Of Rs 65 906 A Y 2004 05 Respectively On Account Of Low Withdrawals Fo R Household Expenses Without Accepting The Explanatio N Offered By The Assessee And Without Considering The Standard Of Living Size Of The Family It Is Further Submitted That During The Course Of S Earch No Incriminating Document Were Found Which Could Form The Basis For Making Addition For Withdrawals For House Hold Expenses Thus The Addition Made For Low Household Withdrawal Is Purely Arbitrary Unjustified Withou T Any Basis And Thus Deserves To Be Deleted 2 That On The Facts And In The Circumstances Of The C Ase Charging Of Interest Of Rs 6458 A Y 2000 01 R S 6447 A Y 2001 02 Rs 7892 A Y 2002 03 And Rs 4757 A Y 2004 05 Respectively U S 234 B Is Not Justi Fied 3 That On The Facts And In The Circumstances Of The C Ase Initiation Of Penalty Proceedings U S 271 1 Is No T Justified During Hearing Of These Appeals We Have Heard Shri K K Singh Learned Cit Dr And Shri H P Verma Along With Ashis H Goyal Learned Counsel For The Assessee The First Ground Raised By The Assessee Pertains To Addition Of Respective Amounts Out Of The Total 3 Addition Made On Account Of Low Household Withdrawa Ls The Contention Of The Learned Counsel For The Assessee Is That The Explanation Adduced By The Assessee Was Not Conside Red By The Revenue Authorities In The Required Manner On The Other Hand The Ld Cit Dr Strongly Defended The Impugned Order By Cont Ending That Necessary Details Were Not Furnished By The Assesse E And Secondly Keeping In View The Size Of The Family And Also The Standard Of Living Of The Assessee Family Rather A Lenient View Has Been Taken By The Department 2 On Perusal Of Record And After Hearing The Rival Submissions We Have Found That The Learned Ao As Well As The Ld C It A Have Analysed The Issue In A Very Required Manner As A Q Uestionnaire Along With Notice U S 142 1 Dated 11 9 2006 Was Issued T O The Assessee As Per Which The Assessee Was Asked To Give The Detail S Of Expenses Incurred In Each Relevant Previous Year For Househo Ld Expenses There Is A Finding That Despite Repeated Opportunit Ies The Assessee Did Not Furnish The Required Details And Ultimately By Keeping The Size And Living Standard Of The Family The Impugned Additio N Was Made There Is A Further Finding In The Assessment Order Page 4 That Various 4 Members Of The Assessee Group Gave Contradictory Ex Planations Vide Replies Dated 8 11 2006 Which Were Filed Later On The Details Of Withdrawals Have Been Duly Considered In The Assess Ment Order As Is Evident From Page 3 Onwards Of The Order Which Are Not Being Repeated Being The Matter Of Record Even A Compara Tive Chart Of Withdrawals Has Been Mentioned In The Assessment Or Der The Learned Cit A Against The Estimation Of Rs 4500 Per Mont H Has Reduced It To Rs 2000 Per Month All These Facts Clearly I Ndicate That Keeping In View The Facts Stated In The Impugned Order Asse Ssment Order And The Arguments Advanced By The Learned Respective Co Unsels There Is No Infirmity In The Impugned Order Consequently T His Ground Of The Assessee Fails And Is Dismissed 3 The Next Ground Pertains To Charging Of Interest U S 234 B Of The Act Under The Aforestated Facts It Is Consequent Ial In Nature Therefore Decided Against The Assessee 4 The Next Ground Pertains To Initiation Of Penalt Y Proceedings U S 271 1 Of The Act It Is Observed That It Is Quite Pre Matured As The Appeals Before Us Are Quantum Proceedings 5 5 As Far As The Appeal Ita No 75 Ind 08 Of Shri Jitendra Kumar Jain Is Concerned The Learned Representatives Fro M Both The Sides Contended That The Factsare Identical To The Case O F Shri Balchand Jain Therefore Same View May Be Taken In The Present Ap Peals Also In View Of This Assertion Of The Learned Respective Co Unsels And The Facts Of The Present Appeals Since The Appeals In The Ca Se Of Shri Balchand Jain Have Been Dismissed Supra Consequently This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Also Dismissed 6 In The Result All The Appeals Of The Assessee A Re Dismissed Order Pronounced In The Open Court In The Presence Of Both The Learned Representatives Of The Parties On 21 12 200 9 Sd Sd V K Gupta Joginder Singh Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated 21 01 10 Copy To Appellant Respondent Cit Cit A Dr Gu Ard File Dn 6