SHRI SALIM ZIKAR GHANIWALA,NAGPUR vs. D.C.I.T. CEN TRAL CIR. AMRAVARI NOW ADDITIONAL CHARGE WITH ACIT, CENT. CIR-2(2),NAGPUR, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 159/NAG/2016Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 March 2018AY 2001-023 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the opening capital cannot be added in the relevant assessment year. If the opening capital is not proved, it should have been added in an earlier year. Therefore, the addition of opening capital was deleted.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer treated the opening capital of the assessees for the assessment year 2001-02 as unexplained, disallowing a portion of it. The assessees had provided capital accounts explaining their opening balances from previous years.

What were the issues?

Whether the opening capital declared by the assessees for the assessment year 2001-02 could be treated as unexplained and added to their income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL & SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH

For Respondent: Shri R.K. Baral, Senior DR
Hearing: 08.03.2018Pronounced: 08.03.2018

Heard together (3 matters)

I.T.A. No.156/Nag/2016
I.T.A. No.159/Nag/2016
I.T.A. No.3/Nag/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER BENCH :

These three appeals by different assessees for the assessment year 2001-02 are directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-III, Nagpur dated 30.11.2015, 05.11.2015 and 05.10.2015. Since the issue involved in all these appeals is common, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order.

2.

The only common issue in these three appeals of the assessees is as regards the order of learned CIT(A) in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in treating the opening capital amounting to `50,000/- in ITA No.156/Nag/2016, `46,548/- in ITA No.159/Nag/2016 and `1,39,921/- in ITA No.3/Nag/2016 for assessment year 2001-02 as unexplained.

3.

Since the facts and circumstances are exactly identical in all these appeals, hence, we will take up the facts from ITA No.156/Nag/2016 and decide the issue.

4.

We have heard rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Brief facts are that the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment u/s 153C of the Act treated the opening capital as on 01.04.2000 declared by the assessee at `68,000/- as unexplained. Finally, the Assessing Officer treated the sum of `50,000/- as unexplained for the reason that the assessee could not prove that this amount is received from his father by way of will or any other evidences. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before learned CIT(A), who also confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. We find from the facts of the case that the assessee has filed capital account from financial year 1992-93 to 2000-01 explaining the opening balance. We are of the view that opening balance cannot be added in the

3 ITA-156, 159 & 3/Nag/2016 relevant year. In any case, if the opening capital is not proved, it has to be added in the earlier year, if at all. In view of this, we are of the view that the addition of opening capital in all the three cases will not sustain and hence, we delete the same.

5.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed. Decision pronounced in the open Court on 08.03.2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (G.D. AGRAWAL) (MAHAVIR SINGH) PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated : 08.03.2018 VK.

Copy of the order forwarded to :

1.

The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R. Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →