Abdul Majid A-14/109-B, DDA Flats, Inderlok, Delhi-110035 Vs. ITO, Ward-19(3), New Delhi.
August, 04th 2014
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH : `A' N EW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGARWAL, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT
SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 5097/Del/ 2013
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Abdul Majid Vs. ITO, Ward-19(3),
A-14/109-B, DDA Flats, New Delhi.
(PAN AOJPM 6170 L)
Appellant by : Ms. Y. Kakkar, D.R.
Respondent by : Shri Devinder Pal, Advocate
PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M:
1. The assessee has filed present appeal against the impugned order dated
25.02.2013 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi for A.Y. 2008-09.
2. The facts related by the authorities are not disputed by both the parties, but
for the sake of convenience the facts relating to the issue in dispute are that the
assessee filed his return of income on 27.06.2008, declaring total income at
Rs.1,20,310/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section
143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") on
27.12.2010 at an income of Rs.18,65,610/- after making addition of Rs.17,45,300/-
2 ITA No. 5097/Del/ 2013
as unexplained deposits in the Bank account of the assessee at Standard Chartered
3. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 27.12.2010, the assessee filed an
appeal before the First Appellate Authority, who vide order dated 25.02.2013
dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Now, the assessee is aggrieved against the
impugned order has filed the present appeal.
4. At the time of hearing, ld. counsel for the assessee filed a small paper book,
which includes written submissions and some documentary evidence including the
case laws in support to the case of assessee. At the time of hearing, ld. counsel for
the assessee Shri Devinder Pal Singh, Advocate stated that due to negligence of
counsel appeared before the lower revenue authority the assessee could not file
documentary evidence for supporting the claim of assessee and he requested that
some more opportunity may be given to the assessee for substantiating his claim
before the Assessing Officer and the issues in dispute may be set aside to the
Assessing Officer to decide the same fresh under the law after giving an
opportunity to the assessee.
5. Ld. D.R. relied upon the order passed by the ld. First Appellate Authority
and oppose the request of ld. counsel for the assessee.
6. We have heard both the parties, perused the relevant records before us and
especially the order passed by the Revenue along with documentary evidence filed
by the ld. counsel for the assessee in support of the claim of assessee.
3 ITA No. 5097/Del/ 2013
7. As per the order of the Assessing Officer, we want to reproduce the
observations of the Assessing Officer, which the ld. First Appellate Authority has
also reproduced in Para 6, Pages 3&4 of the impugned order, which is reproduced
"Observations of the Assessing Officer
The Assessing Officer has observed as under in the Assessment Order u/s
143(3) dated 27.12.2010:-
In this case the return of income was filed on 27.06.2008 declaring total
income at Rs.1,20,310/- which was processed u/s 143(1). The case was
selected for scrutiny through CASS. Statutory notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1)
issued. In response thereto, Shri Amod Agrawal, CA attended and he was
served copy of AIR and directed to explain the source of cash deposits in the
Standard Chartered Bank amounting to Rs.17,45,300/- on 31.3.08 &
Rs.18,01,401/- on 31.3.08. Mr. Agarwal stated that the assessee has not
deposited Rs.18,01,400/-. Mr. Agarwal was directed to explain the balance
cash deposits of Rs.17,45,300/- by the assessee in the Standard Chartered
Bank. He did explained the source of deposit of cash of Rs.17,45,300/- by
the assessee in the Standard Chartered Bank. He got adjournment of case on
7.12.10 for 14.12.10. None attended on 14.12.10.
Again show case notice dt. 21.12.10 was served on the assessee on 23.12.10
to explain the sources of cash deposits of Rs.17,45,300/- fixing the case for
24.12.10. On 14.12.10 none attended. This attitude of the assessee shows
that he has no documentary evidence of sources of deposit of cash of
Rs.17,45,300/- in the Standard Chartered Bank. Therefore these cash
deposits of Rs.17,45,300/- is treated as income of the assessee from
8. We have thoroughly going through the aforesaid observations of the
Assessing Officer and we are of the view that the Assessing Officer has himself
admitted that the assessee did explain the source of deposit of cash of
Rs.17,45,300/- deposited in the Standard Chartered Bank, but in the last the
Assessing Officer has made the addition of the some amount as income of the
4 ITA No. 5097/Del/ 2013
assessee from undisclosed and completed the assessment on 27.12.2010 under
Section 143(3) of the Act. Ld. First Appellate Authority has also overlooked this
observation of the Assessing Officer wrongly upheld the assessment order.
Without going through the matter of the case and discussing/appreciating the
evidence produced by the assessee, we are of the view that the request of the ld.
counsel for the assessee for setting aside the issue in dispute to the Assessing
Officer should be accepted and we accept the request of the assessee by directing
the Assessing Officer to decide the issues in dispute afresh under the law and
provides sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating his claim before
the Assessing Officer and decide the case of assessee as per law.
9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 01.08.2014
(G.D. AGARWAL) (H.S. SIDHU)
Vice President Judicial Member
Copy of the order forwarded to:-
3. CIT (Appeals) concerned
4. CIT concerned
5. D.R., ITAT,