Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D”, BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM
�थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAJPB 7004 J .. (अपीलाथ� /Appellant) (��यथ� / Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S. Dasgupta, C.A Revenue by : Shri A.K.Sinha, JCIT सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of Hearing : 16/03/2017 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement 12/04/2017 आदेश / O R D E R
Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:
The captioned appeal filed by the Assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-2011, is directed against the order passed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)-13, Kolkata, dated 02.02.2016, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), dated,07.01.2013.
Brief facts of the case qua the assessee are that the assessee filed her return of income for the assessment year under consideration on 31.03.2011 disclosing total income at Rs.5,13,050/-. The return of income was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act. Later on, assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny u/s.143(3) of the Act and the AO has completed the assessment by making the addition of Rs.86,935/- on account of negative cash balance in the cash book as on 30.03.2010 and the same was Income Tax Act, 1961 and added to the total income of the assessee.
Not being satisfied with the order of ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who has confirmed the order passed by the AO observing the following :-
I have gone through the contention of the assessee, the order passed by the AO and the submissions made by the Appellant. The decision of this appeal is given as under:- The appeal is filled by the appellant as against addition of negative cash balance. Only one ground of appeal has been filled. The addition relates to the issue of addition on account of Negative balance found by the AO to the tune of Rs.86935/- in the cash book for the month of Feb-2010 & March 2010 and AO added under section 69(c) on the ground that the same could not be explained by the appellant and did not consider the plea of the appellant that the difference arose due to wrongly mentioned date against cash while preparing the cash balance. The AO further observed that the submissions made by the appellant were nor supported by any evidence. At the appellate stage the Appellant has submitted his revised cash book. The appellant has relied over the comparative study of the given cash book and extracted statement of the cash Book for the month of Feb 2010 & March 2010. The appellant's submission has been perused. The reliance of the appellant over summary of cash book is not reliable as the AO has worked out total cash deposit and withdrawals in the Assessment order date wise. Perusal of entries shows that there is negative balance at various places. The AO has found that on perusal Balance Sheet filed by the appellant for the F.Y 2009-10 the figure of loan of Rs.68000/- debit has been shown at Nil. Considering the facts & plea of the assessee that receipts of Rs.68000/- has wrongly been shown in Feb 2011 instead of February 2010, the AO has accepted the same. After giving effect of Rs.68000/- received during the year the negative cash balance Rs.86935/- has been worked out by the AO There was negative cash balance which was worked out at total of Rs.1,54,935/- and the AO allowed the factual mistake of Rs.68000 which was wrongly shown in Feb 2011 instead of Feb-2010 and arrived at figure of Rs.86935/-. The plea of the appellant on entry of wrong date in the cash books is not acceptable as the same is not supported by any material evidence such as day to day sale or cash withdrawals. The matching at the end of the year has no meaning because it’s not tallying date wise. It can be stated merely an 3 Smt. Sharmilla Bose adjustment entry to match the data. The reliance of appellant over summary cash book does not through the real picture of the daily transaction therefore in absence of any evidence, which can controvert negative cash balance, I agree with the addition made by the AO on Negative cash balance and the same is upheld. The appeal of the appellant is dismissed.”
Aggrieved from the order of ld CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us and has taken the following grounds of appeal:
1. For that the confirmation of the order of the Assessing Officer, Order as to the alleged addition/disallowance of Rs.86,935/- on the ground of alleged negative balance in Cash Book for the months of February, 2010 and March, 2010 as unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is contrary to the accounting principles, arbitrary in nature, misinterpretation of the recorded transactions chronologically arranged and without assigning any reasons including the explanations of accounting entries according to the accounting principles and also ignoring the correct arrangement of data entry without disturbing the narrated facts and figures. The First Appellate Authority ignored the computer error due its hard disc problem. Hence, it is bad in law, being not in the nature of unexplained expenditure, liable to be abrograted.
2. For that initiation of Proceedings under section 271(1)(c) is consequential in nature and liable to be set aside upon disposal of Second Appeal in favour of the Appellant. The Appellant craves, leaves to add and/or to amend the Ground or Grounds of Appeal either before or at the time of hearing.
5. Ld. AR for the assessee has stated that the assessee has submitted cash book, before AO, containing the negative cash balance, because assessee’s computer was not working properly. The Ld. AR further submitted before us that the computer of the assessee contains error in the harddisk, therefore, the negative cash balance, and print out thereof, has been submitted wrongly to the AO. Now, the Ld. AR for the assessee has submitted before us the corrected copy of the cash book 4 Smt. Sharmilla Bose which has not contained the negative cash balance. The ld AR also accepted that the corrected cash book, submitted before us, is an additional/ new evidence.
Ld. DR for the Revenue has also primarily relied on the findings of the AO which we have already noted in our earlier para and is not being repeated for the sake of brevity.
Having heard the rival submissions, perused the material on record, we are of the view that this issue requires a fresh examination at the end of the AO, as the ld. AR for the assessee has submitted before us, an additional evidence i.e. corrected cash book, which does not contain any negative cash balance. Therefore, we are of the view that this issue is to be examined by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we direct the AO to examine the corrected cash book of the assessee and compare with the wrong cash book submitted by the assessee and then adjudicate the issue accordingly. We, therefore, allow this appeal for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 12/04/2017. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) (DR. A.L.SAINI) �या�यक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कोलकाता /Kolkata; �दनांक Dated 12/04/2017 �काश �म�ा/Prakash Mishra,�न.स/ SPS