PRITY SINGHAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 755/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11 cuke Prity Singhal, ACIT, Vs. D-122, Ambabari, Circle-4, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ANWPS 5168 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 18/04/2017 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 19/04/2017 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order dated 22/06/2016 passed by the ld CIT(A)-5, Jaipur for the A.Y. 2010- 11, wherein the assessee raised only one ground of appeal, which is as under: “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,83,875/- out of Rs. 4,80,000/- added by the ld. A.O. towards alleged unexplained household expenses. The action of ld. CIT(A) is

ITA 755/JP/2016_ 2 Prity Singhal Vs. ACIT

illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the said addition of Rs. 2,83,875/-.”

gain and other sources. The estimated the household expenses and

made addition of Rs. 4,80,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition at

Rs. 2,83,875/- by holding as under:-

“2.3. I have considered the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. The assessee is a member of joint family consisting of 9 members. The total withdrawals of all members is Rs. 3,56,125, which includes the educational expenses of 3 children. The assessee has an affluent lifestyle and lives in an independent bungalow. Though the electricity expenses of the family have been stated as Rs. 5,000 per month, no supporting bills have been produced. Considering the income level of the assessee and financial status the family, monthly household withdrawals are estimated at least Rs. 5 thousand per person per month, which works out to an annual household withdrawal of Rs. 5,40,000. Further the educational expenses of Rs. 56,125 are towards school fees of assessee’s children only, which has been met out of her husband’s withdrawals. Education expenses of two other children in the family have not been given. The same are estimated to be Rs. 1 lakh per annum. Hence total estimated household expense is Rs. 6,40,000 (Rs. 5,40,000+ Rs. 1 lakh). This results in an unexplained household expenditure of Rs. 2,83,875 (Rs. 6,40,000-Rs. 3,56,125). The addition on this ground is accordingly restricted to Rs. 2,83,875/-.”

staying in a joint family and all the family members contributed for the

common household expenditure. The family is vegetarian and simple

living. The assessee was not the head of the family. There is no addition

ITA 755/JP/2016_ 3 Prity Singhal Vs. ACIT

made in the hands of the head of the family, who is the husband of the

assessee. The ld AR also stated that there was a search operation on

28/7/2012 in the assessee’s group and no addition has been made on

account of household expenses in the hands of any of the family

member. He also stated that no proceedings U/s 153A of the Income

Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) was initiated in respect of the assessee.

He also pleaded that the addition on estimated household expenses

deserves to be deleted.

authorities below.

considered the pleadings of the AR of the assessee. The assessee is

staying a joint family and the household expenses are made out of the

contribution made by the various family members. The assessee was

not the head of the family. No addition was made in the hands of the

other family members on this account. Even during the search operation

as stated by the ld AR at bar that no incriminating documents relating to

the household expenses were found and seized during the search

operation. No proceedings U/s 153A of the Act were initiated in

assessee’s hands. He also stated at bar that no addition has been made

ITA 755/JP/2016_ 4 Prity Singhal Vs. ACIT on account of household expenses in the hands of any of the family

member. Considering all the facts and circumstances, in my considered

view, the addition of Rs. 1.00 lac shall be sufficient to cover the

unexplained household expenses, therefore, I sustain the addition to

that extent only.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/04/2017.

Sd/- ¼Hkkxpan½ (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 19th April, 2017

*Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Smt. Prity Singhal, Jaipur. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ACIT, Circle-4, Jaipur. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 755/JP/2016) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत