Income Tax Officer, Ward-42(2), New Delhi Vs. Km. Gayatri Sekhar, Room No. 109, Aakash Officers, Mess, Zakir Hussain Marg, New Delhi
March, 30th 2015
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH: `C' : NEW DELHI
BEFORE SH. R.S. SYAL, A.M. & SH. I.C. SUDHIR, J.M.
ITA No. 4528/Del/2013
Assessment Year: 2009-10
Income Tax Officer, Vs. Km. Gayatri Sekhar,
Ward-42(2), New Delhi Room No. 109, Aakash Officers,
Mess, Zakir Hussain Marg,
Appellant by : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Respondent by: Sh. S. Sampath
Date of hearing: 27.03.2015
Date of pronouncement: 27.03.2015
PER R.S. SYAL,A.M.:
This appeal by the Revenue arises out of the order of the CIT(A) dated
31.05.2013 in relation to the assessment year 2009-10.
2. The solitary ground raised in this appeal is against the deletion of addition
of Rs. 62 lakh on account of cash deposited in ICICI bank and Rs. 80,322/- on
account of interest income.
3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is an employee of
Indian Air Force. A sum of Rs. 62 lakh was deposited in her bank account
maintained with ICICI bank on 29.08.2008. On being called upon to explain the
source of deposit of such amount in her bank account, she stated that her parents
were residing outside India during the relevant financial year. The property
jointly held by them was sold by her during the year on the basis of Power of
attorney and the sale proceeds were deposited in her bank account in cash. In
support of her claim, she filed copy of the returns filed by her parents for the
assessment year under consideration. The returns filed by the parents revealed
that they had declared sale consideration at Rs. 31 lakh each as the full value of
consideration in the computation of income under the head `Capital gains'. Not
convinced, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 62 lakh in the hands of
the assessee. Apart from that, he also made an addition of Rs. 80,322/- towards
the interest income earned from bank, which was not declared. The learned
CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 62 lakh against which the Revenue has come
up in the appeal before us.
4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material
available on record. It is observed that the assessee duly stated the source of
deposit of Rs. 62 lakh in her bank account, being the sale proceeds of the
property held by her parents. Not only that, she also furnished copy of their
returns of income declaring sale consideration at Rs. 31 lakh each. The mere fact
that registered value of property was stated to be at Rs. 9,80,000/-, cannot be a
criteria to reject the assessee's contention of the actual sale consideration at Rs.
62 lakh, more so, when the same sale consideration was duly declared by her
parents in their respective returns of income. In our considered opinion, the
assessee fully discharged the onus cast upon her to give the source of deposit of
Rs. 62 lakh in her bank account. The addition, if any, could have been
considered in the hands of the buyer showing lower purchase consideration. The
assessee cannot be saddled with any further liability. The impugned order is,
therefore, upheld to this extent.
5. As regards the other part of the ground about the deletion of addition of
Rs. 80,322/- on account of interest income, we find that there is no decision
given by the learned CIT(A) sustaining or deleting this addition. This part of the
ground, therefore, cannot be said to arise from the impugned order. The same is
therefore, dismissed as infructuous.
6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
The decision is pronounced in the open court on 27th March, 2015.
(I.C. Sudhir) (R.S. Syal)
Judicial Member Accountant Member
Dated: 27th March, 2015.
Copy forwarded to:
Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi