ITO, Ward 27(4), New Delhi. Vs. Sant Meet Singh, B-2/25, Janak Puri, New Delhi.
April, 10th 2015
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCHES : G : NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM AND SHRI C.M. GARG, JM
Assessment Year : 2008-09
ITO, Vs. Sant Meet Singh,
Ward 27(4), B-2/25, Janak Puri,
New Delhi. New Delhi.
Assessee By : Shri C.S. Anand, Advocate
Department By : Shri B.R.R. Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing : 08.04.2015
Date of Pronouncement : 09.04.2015
PER R.S. SYAL, AM:
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by
the CIT(A) on 20.2.2013 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09.
2. The only ground raised in this appeal is against restricting the
addition amounting to Rs.21,89,574/- made by the AO u/s 69C of the
Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called `the Act') to Rs.1 lac.
3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an
insurance agent. As per the AIR, a sum of Rs.21,89,574/- was deposited
in the assessee's bank account. On being called upon to explain the
source of this amount, it was stated that the credit card statements were
issued in the name of the assessee, but, the account was actually used by
one Shri Liyakat Ali, proprietor of M/s Sajid Automobiles, engaged in
the business of two-wheelers and spare parts. The assessee contended
that he allowed Liyakat Ali to use his bank account in the hope of
getting insurance covers for two-wheelers purchased transacted by him.
Not convinced with the assessee's submissions, the AO made an
addition for a sum of Rs.21.89 lac. The ld. CIT(A) restricted the
addition to Rs.1.00 lac, after considering the remand report from the
4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant
material on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee is an
insurance agent doing insurance of two-wheelers, three-wheelers, etc. A
sum of Rs.21.89 lac was routed through his bank account and the
transactions were actually done by Shri Liyakat Ali, proprietor of M/s
Sajid Automobiles. The assessee also demonstrated that the payments
against the credit cards were made by Shri Liyakat Ali for two-wheelers
purchased by him from M/s Diwan Auto, M/s Rajpoot Motors and M/s
Amazing Enterprises. Even confirmation from M/s Rajpoot Motors was
also submitted to the effect that the payment for spare parts purchased
from them by Liyakat Ali, was made through the assessee's bank
account. The assessee was getting a sum of Rs.2,000/- per vehicle in
lieu of allowing the user of his bank account, which position has been
admitted by the AO in his order for the AY 2009-10. The relevant
discussion on this issue has been made in paras 4.1 and 4.2 of the
impugned order. In our considered opinion, the ld. CIT(A) was justified
in relying on the view taken by the AO for the AY 2009-10 in restricting
the addition from Rs.21.89 lac to Rs.1 lac, by rounding off the income
@ Rs.2,000/- per vehicle in respect of 38 vehicles transacted during the
year. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order.
5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.
The order pronounced in the open court on 09.04.2015.
[C.M. GARG] [R.S. SYAL]
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated, 09th April, 2015.
Copy forwarded to:
4. CIT (A)
5. DR, ITAT
AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.