Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘ B’ BENCH : CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
आदेश / O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem dated 12.03.2018 and pertains to the assessment year 2011-12.
Shri. T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, the ld. Representative for the assessee submitted that assessee is a partner in M/s. S. A Poultry Farm. The sale proceeds of the partnership firm was deposited in the individual account of the assessee with Indian Bank, in SB No. 711791958, Gugai Branch, Salem. Referring to Section 14 of the Indian Partnership Act, the ld. Representative submitted that any money deposited in the name of partner belongs to the partnership firm. Therefore, it cannot be treated as unaccounted deposit u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’). On a query from the Bench, when the Assessing Officer finds that the assessee is not a partner in the partnership firm, how the deposit could be treated as that of the firm, the ld. Representative very fairly submitted that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for reconsideration and the assessee is ready and willing to prove that the assessee is also one of the partner in partnership before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Representative further submitted that for the assessment year 2012-2013, the Assessing Officer after reopening the assessment found that the money deposited in the very same bank account belongs to the partnership firm.
On the contrary, Shri. Pavitran Kumar, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that assessee is not a partner in the partnership firm and there was no transaction with the partnership firm also. The assessee engaged himself in the business of textile and he is not connected with the partnership firm. Therefore, the Assessing Officer rightly treated the entire amount as his income u/s.68 of the Act.
Having heard the Ld. Representative of the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be re-examined by the Assessing Officer since assessee specifically claimed that he is a partner in M/s.
S.A. Poultry Farm and the Assessing Officer also accepted his contention for the assessment year 2012-2013. Accordingly, the orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the entire issue raised by the assessee is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall re-examine the matter on the basis of the copy of the partnership deed that may be filed by the assessee, thereafter decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
4 -: Order pronounced in the open court on 7th February, 2020, at camp at Coimbatore.