Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK
Before: SHRI N.S SAINI
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-
2, Bhubaneswar, dated 23.8.2016 for the assessment year 2010-2011.
The sole grievance of the assessee in this appeal is that the CIT(A)
erred in confirming the addition of Rs.21,50,000/- u/s.68 of the Act.
The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed
that during the year the assessee had made deposit of Rs.21,50,000/- in
the bank account with ING Vyasya Bank Ltd. He observed that there are
cash deposit of Rs.11,50,000/- and cheque deposit of Rs.10,00,000/-
aggregating to Rs.21,50,000/-. The assessee claimed that these are
contract receipts and only 8% of Rs.21,50,000/- amounting to
2 ITA No. 427/CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Year :20 10- 11
Rs.1,72,000/- is chargeable to tax. The Assessing Officer did not accept
the explanation of the assessee and brought to tax Rs.21,50,000/- u/s.68
of the Act.
On appeal before the CIT(A), the assessee contended that it had
receipts by cheque of Rs.10,00,000/- from Shri Akhaya Kumar Patra, who
confirmed having paid the sum of Rs.10 lakhs in response to notice 133 of
the Act. Further, Rs.11,50,000/- was received from 14 persons in cash as
under:
SI. Name & Address Amount Date of receipt by No. the appellant. 1. Balunkeswar das. 77,000 15/04/2009 At/Po- Datatotta sahi, Dist-Puri 2. Jayanta Pattnayak 81,200 21/04/2009 Plot No. -125, Bapuji Nagar, Bhubaneswar 3. Suresh Das 92,400 16/05/2009 SB1 Colony, Keshura, Jharapara, Bhubaneswar 4 Jayanta Pattnayak 81,200 27/05/2009 Plot No. -125, Bapuji Nagar, Bhubaneswar 5 Jayanta Pattnayak 81,200 27/05/2009 Plot No. -125, Bapuji Nagar, Bhubaneswar 6 Somanath mishra At/Po-Datatotta Sahi, 77,000 29/05/2009 Dist-Puri 7 Jayanta Pattnayak 81,200 04/06/2009 Plot No. -125, Bapuji Nagar, Bhubaneswar 8 i(J.ndra Satpathy, 92,400 23/06/2009 'Shop No. 12, Krishna Homeo Clinic, Siripur, Bhubaneswar. 9 Namita Sahoo 77,000 03/07/2009 Plot No-69, Dumduma Housing Board Colony, Bhubaneswar-19 10 Manjulata Sahu 81,200 21/08/2009 Plot No.69, Dumuduma, H.B. colony, Bhubaneswar. 11 Rohit Bhanj, At-Aiginia, PO: Dumuduma, 80,000 26/08/2009 Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar. 12. Bhobani Puhamn & Prahulla Behera, At: 75,000 20.10.2009
3 ITA No. 427/CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Year :20 10- 11
Maechheli, PO: Mahipur, Nayagarh 13. Khirabdhi Tanaya Pradhan, At/PO: Ganda- 85,000 28.10.2009 Munda, Siripur, BBSR 14. Arup Mohanty, Labour Colony, Unit-3, BBSR 96,000 15.11.2009
He submitted that out of 14 persons, four persons appeared before
the Assessing Officer, namely Smt. Manjulata Sahu from whom
Rs.81,200/- was received, Smt. Namita Sahu from whom Rs.77,000/-
was received, Shr Rohit Bhanj from whom Rs.80,000/- was received and
Shri Indra Satpathy from whom Rs.92,400/- was received who confirmed
having given the amount to the assessee for the construction of boundary
wall and they were income tax assessee and PAN numbers were
submitted. It was his submission that the addition should be deleted.
The CIT(A), however confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer
on the ground that creditworthiness and genuineness of above persons
were not proved.
Before me, ld A.R.of the assessee submitted that he has filed
additional evidence before the Tribunal in the paper book in the form of
bank statement of Shri Akhshya Kumar Patra, copy of confirmation of Shri
A.K.Patra and prayed that the matter should be restored back to the file
of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication of the issue afresh in the light
of the evidence now filed before the Tribunal. Further, he submitted that
with regard to four persons who appeared before the Assessing Officer
and confirmed having advanced money to the assessee and also filed
4 ITA No. 427/CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Year :20 10- 11
their PAN Numbers, therefore, the addition should be deleted. Ld A.R.
submitted that with regard to balance 10 persons from whom the
assessee had received Rs.8,90,400/- should be confirmed as the assessee
could neither produce them before the Assessing Officer nor file
confirmation from them
Ld D.R. supported the orders of lower authorities.
In the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the
considered view that since the assessee has filed additional evidence
before the Tribunal in the form of bank statement of State Bank of India,
Dumduma Branch confirming the loan etc, by Shri A.K.Patra, in the
interest of natural justice, the matter should be restored back to the
Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication of loan of Rs.10 lakhs after
allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
9.1 As regards to the amount received from four persons in cash, who
appeared before the Assessing Officer and confirmed having given money
to the assessee and also filed their PAN numbers, I am of the considered
opinion that no material has been brought on record by the Assessing
Officer after examining those persons to show that they could not have
advanced money to the assessee or that the advances given are not
genuine. Therefore, I delete the addition of Rs.3,30,600/- from four
persons.
5 ITA No. 427/CT K/ 2016 Asse ssment Year :20 10- 11
9.2 With regard to balance amount of Rs..8,90,400/-, received from 10
persons, the A.R. of the assessee very fairly conceded that it should be
added to the income of the assessee. Therefore,I confirm the addition of
Rs.8,90,400/- under section 68 of the Act.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for
statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 10 /08/2017.
Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Cuttack; Dated 10 /08/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The appellant : Prallilpta Kumar Nanda, Plot No.472, Gandamunda, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar 2. The respondent: ITO Ward 2(4), Bhubaneswar. 3. The CIT(A) -2, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-2, Bhubaneswar BY ORDER, 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack-