Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

ITO, Ward 34(3) Room No.318 Block D Vikas Bhavan, IP Estate New Delhi 110 002 Vs. Sh.Praveen Kumar Jain I-92, Gali no.10, Brahampuri Delhi 110 053
June, 12th 2015
             IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                  DELHI BENCH "F", NEW DELHI

           BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                              AND
          SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                          I.T.A.No4803/DEL/2012
                                (A.Y. 2007-08)
ITO, Ward 34(3)                           Sh.Praveen Kumar Jain
Room No.318 Block D                  Vs. I-92, Gali no.10, Brahampuri
Vikas Bhavan, IP Estate                   Delhi 110 053
New Delhi 110 002
                                            PAN: ACYPJ 6551 H

       (APPELLANT)                                     (RESPONDENT)


          Assessee by                  :   Sh.Ved Prakash Bansal, C.A.
         Department by                 :   Sh. Vikram Sahay, Sr. DR

                               ORDER
PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER



     This is an appeal filed by the Revenue directed against the order dt.
8.6.2012 of Ld.CIT(A)-XXVII, New Delhi pertaining to the Assessment Year
(AY) 2007-08, wherein the assessment order passed by the AO u/s 143(3)
dt. 30.11.2009, and a subsequent rectification order passed by the AO u/s
154 of the Act on 12.4.2010,   was held as illegal. The grounds of Revenue
read as under.






           "1. On the facts and [in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.
           CIT(A) had erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,16,805/ - as
           unexplained purchases of NSCs and KVPs made by the A.O. u/s
           154 of the I.T. Act.
           2 .On the facts, and in the 'circumstances of the case, the Ld.
           CIT(A) had erred in para -10, page ,6 of his order that the
           appellant made withdrawal in cash
           In totaling to Rs.13,67,798/- from OBC and Rs. 1,47,0001- from
           the HDFC Bank for purchase of NSCs/KVPs as the statement
           filed show that withdrawals of the dates specified by the
                               ITA No. 4803/Del/2012
                                    AY 2007-08
                             Praveen Kumar Jain, Delhi

            assessee have been made for other than cash also such as for
            making pay order/ drafts.
            3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.
            CIT(A) had erred in not correlating withdrawals made with the
            payments made to the purchasers of NSCs/KVPs."
            The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any or all the
            grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the
            appeal."


2.    We have heard Shri Ved Prakash Bansal, C.A. Ld.Counsel for the
assessee and Shri Vikram Sahay, Ld.Sr.D.R. on behalf of the Revenue.

3.    The Ld.CIT(A) at para 9 and 10 of his order held as follows.

"9.    I have carefully considered the submissions of the appellant and the
facts of the case. Firstly, as submitted by the appellant the addition made by
the A.O. amounting to Rs.15,16,805/- representing unexplained investment in
NSC/KVP cannot be made U/S 154 of the Act as it is not a mistake apparent
from the record as held in various judgments relied upon by the appellant
referred to above. Moreover, the bank accounts of the appellant had already
been examined u/s 143(3) of the Act. On this ground alone the rectification
order passed u/s 154 of the Act by the A.O. deserves to be set aside.






10. On merits also it is seen that the primary reason why the A.O. has
made this addition to the income of the appellant is that though there were
cash deposits in the appellant's bank accounts amounting to Rs. 15,34,420/-,
there were no corresponding cash withdrawals to explain the source of
investment in the purchase of NSC/KVPs amounting to Rs. 15,16,805/-. On
perusal of the bank accounts of the appellant with OBC & HDFC Banks, it is
seen that the appellant had withdrawn various amounts in cash totaling
Rs.13,67,798/- from the OBC bank and Rs. 1,47,0001- from his HDFC Bank
account. The appellant during the course of the current proceeding had filed a
copy of these bank accounts placed at Page No. 203 to 213 of the paper book
which were forwarded to the A.O. for his comments. The AO in his comments
on the same has not drawn any adverse inference with regard to the cash
withdrawals shown by the appellant from these accounts. Thus, the primary
reason for making the addition itself has been found to be factually incorrect.
Therefore, on merits also the addition deserves to be deleted. The A.O. is
directed accordingly."




                                                                                  2
                                ITA No. 4803/Del/2012
                                     AY 2007-08
                              Praveen Kumar Jain, Delhi

4.      We find no infirmity in the same. The AO in this case made huge
additions in the guise of rectification proceedings u/s 154 of the Act.
Sources of purchase of NSCs and KVPs cannot be a subject matter of
rectification u/s 154 of the Act.        It is well settled that only mistakes
apparent on record can be rectified u/s 154 of the Act. Thus, we dismiss
this appeal filed by the Revenue.

5.      In the result the Revenue 's appeal is dismissed.


        Order pronounced in the Open Court on 11th June, 2015.




           Sd/-                                                  Sd/-
   [I.C.SUDHIR]                                           [J. SUDHAKAR REDDY]
JUDICIAL MEMBER                                           ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dt.    the 11th June, 2015


      · Manga




Copy forwarded to: -

1.      Appellant
2.      Respondent
3.      CIT
4.      CIT (A)
5.      DR, ITAT
                                TRUE COPY

                                                              By Order,




                                      Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Benches




                                                                                 3

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting