Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, HON’BLE & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 31/03/2014 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – XXXII, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2009 – 10 wherein the assessee’s appeal was partly allowed.
The brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was Assessment year 2009-10 conducted on the business and residential premises of the assessee on 26th of March 2010. The case of the assessee was centralised under section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and, thereafter, a notice under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued. In response, the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year under consideration declaring a total income of Rs. 1,75,845/-. Thereafter, the assessment was completed under section 153A read with section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at a total income of Rs. 3,82,720/- after making an addition of Rs. 2,06,876/- on account of alleged unexplained payments made against credit card bills. On appeal before the Ld. CIT (Appeals), the Ld. CIT (Appeals) gave partial relief to the assessee by noting that payments amounting to Rs. 87,300/- were made through cheques were liable to be deleted and the balance payment of rupees 1,19,576/-, which was stated to have been paid through cash out of salary income and withdrawals from the bank account, was liable to be confirmed.
Thus, the addition was curtailed to rupees 1,19,576/- and now the assessee has approached the ITAT and has challenged this partial confirmation by raising the following grounds of appeal:-
Assessment year 2009-10 “1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXXII, New Delhi has grossly erred both in law and on facts in sustaining an addition of Rs. 1,19,576/- representing alleged unexplained expenditure incurred by the appellant despite the fact that the learned Assessing Officer had not made any adverse comments in the remand report in respect of explanation tendered by the appellant.
2. That adverse finding of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that appellant had not furnished any evidence in support of claim of availability of cash is factually incorrect and contrary to record and therefore not tenable. It is therefore prayed that, it be held that, addition made by learned Assessing Officer and, sustained by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) may kindly be deleted and appeal of the appellant be allowed.”
The Ld. Authorised Representative submitted that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) had partially confirmed the addition without appreciating the various evidences which had been filed by the assessee to substantiate that the assessee had adequate cash available with him to pay the credit card bills. Our attention was drawn to cash withdrawal and deposit statement for the period under consideration and it was submitted that this statement had been submitted both before the assessing officer as well as the Ld. CIT (Appeals) but the same had been disregarded by the lower authorities. It was submitted that the lower authorities did not consider the submissions of the assessee at all. It was Assessment year 2009-10 submitted that assessee had ample cash with him so as to pay the credit card bills.
In response, the Ld. Departmental Representative read out extensively from the assessment order as well as the order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) and vehemently argued that the addition had been rightly made and that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) had been fair enough in giving due credit for the payments made through cheques.
We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the material on record. The perusal of the cash withdrawal and deposit statement as referred to by the Ld. AR shows that the assessee had a total cash available of Rs. 2,20,000/- with him during the period under consideration which was adequate to cover the cash payment of Rs. 1,19,576/-. It is undisputed that this statement was submitted before both the lower authorities but the same was not considered by either of them. The Ld. Departmental Representative also could not point out any defect in this withdrawal and deposit statement. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that, in absence of any evidence to the contrary, the assessee had sufficient cash available with him to make cash payments of Rs.1,19,576/- against the credit card 4 Assessment year 2009-10 bills and the inference drawn by the lower authorities in this regard was incorrect. Accordingly, we deem it fit to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) on this issue and direct the AO to delete this addition of Rs. 1,19,576/- also.
In the final result the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 31st October, 2017.