CIT vs. VANDANA VERMA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 03.08.2011 . Present: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. Ms. Poonam Ahuja, Advocate for the respondent. . . +ITA 922/2011 . The assessee had filed return for the Assessment Year 2006-07 declaring an income of `1,29,860/-. The return was processed and notice was issued to the respondent/assessee. Pursuant thereto, her representative appeared on 29.08.2007. However, thereafter he did not appear. The Assessing Officer made ex-parte assessment under Section 144 of the Act. The Assessing Officer found that in the bank statement furnished by the Punjab National Bank, where the assessee was maintaining her account, the assessee had declared total cash/cheque receipt of `1,53,80,213/-. The assessee had declared gross receipts of `24,92,158/- in the income tax return. On this basis the Assessing Officer formed the view that the assessee had not declared the remaining receipts in the sum of `1,28,47,023/- (i.e. `1,53,80,213 (-) `25,33,190/-) and made the addition of the aforesaid amount to the income of the assessee as ?income from undisclosed sources?. The assessee preferred appeal thereagainst before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee also moved an application under Rule 416 of the I.T. Rules for additional evidence. Her explanation was that her representative, who was a Chartered Accountant and who had appeared on 29.08.2007 before the Assessing Officer, did not appear thereafter without informing the assessee in this behalf. The assessee?s explanation was, thus, that she had given all the papers and documents to the said Chartered Accountant and remained under the impression that her Chartered Accountant was representing her and had she known about the non-appearance of the Chartered Accountant, she would have taken steps herself in this regard. This explanation was found justified by the . . CIT(A) who admitted the additional evidence. In the additional evidence given by the assessee, she had mentioned that though there were receipts in her bank account in the sum of `1,53,80,213/-, the Assessing Officer did not look into the entries of the withdrawal side. She also explained that the she was in the business of travel agency and was making bookings for customers on behalf of M/s.J.K. Tourism Dev Corp. She used to receive 100% advance from the customers and was passing on approximately 85% thereof to M/s. J.K. Dev Corp. and was retaining balance 15% for incurring office and related business expenses. Thus, the entire receipt of `1,53,80,213/- was not her income and she had disclosed her income properly treating gross receipts of `24,92,158/- and commission of `41,032/-. From this she had deducted expenses incurred by her and thus income was declared at `1,29,860/-. The CIT(A) looked into all these aspects and satisfied himself about the correctness/veracity of the aforesaid stand on the basis of books of accounts and business bills etc. produced by the assessee. He, thus, deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The ITAT confirmed the aforesaid order. The entire case rests on the facts found by the two authorities on the basis of evidence produced. No question of law arises. The appeal is hereby dismissed. . . A.K. SIKRI, J. . M.L.MEHTA, J. August 03, 2011 Awanish . #41