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, 27.10.2016 for the assessment year 2009-2010 .
The sole issue involved in this appeal is that the ld CIT(A) is not
justified in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer making addition of
Rs.6,68,469/- u/s.69C of the Income tax Act, 1961.
I have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of lower
authorities and materials available on record. The undisputed facts of the
case are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing
2 ITA No. 40/ CTK/2017 Asse ssment Year :20 09- 201 0
Officer found that the assessee has five credit cards of different banks
namely; ICICI Bank, Citi Bank, HDFC Bank, state of India and Axis Bank.
From the AIR information, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee
had made payment of Rs.25,04,397/- using three credit cards. He further
found that the assessee has shown gross receipts of Rs.20,96,350/-,
expenditure of Rs.19,28,650/- and net profit of Rs.1,67,700/- from the
business of readymade garments. Therefore, the Assessing Officer
concluded that the expenditure shown by the assessee was Rs.19,28,650/-
and the payments shown to have been made using five credit cards of
Rs.25,97,119/- and the source of balance expenditure of Rs.6,68,469/-
remained unexplained. The assessee was asked by the Assessing Officer
for details of transaction in respect of five credit cards but the assessee
submitted details in respect of only three credit cards namely; ICICI Bank,
State Bank of India and Axis Bank. Further, the total credits in these three
credit cards did not match with the gross receipts of Rs.20,96,350/- shown
in the return of income. Therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of
Rs.6,68,469/- to the income of the assessee u/s.69C of the Act.
On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer
observing that it was not in dispute that payment of Rs.25,04,397/- was
made by the assessee using the five credit cards. The assessee has only
one account in ICICI Bank and the receipts in that account are of
Rs.15,35,073/-. Further, receipts in ICICI credit card, Axis Bank credit card
and Citi credit card are of Rs.47,317/-, Rs.74,065/ and Rs.5,00,556/-
3 ITA No. 40/ CTK/2017 Asse ssment Year :20 09- 201 0
aggregating of the receipts of three credit cards is Rs.21,07,011/-. The
gross receipts shown by the assessee in the return of income are of
Rs.20,96,350/-. Therefore, considering the entire facts of the case, he was
in agreement with the Assessing Officer that the source of payment of
Rs.6,68,469/- remained unexplained and addition made by the Assessing
Officer u/s.69C of the Act was confirmed by him.
Aggrieved by this order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before
me.
Before me, ld A.R. reiterated the submissions made before the lower
authorities. When the Bench asked ld A.R. of the assessee for copies of
bank statements of all the credit cards used by the assessee of different
banks, he expressed his inability to submit the same on the ground that
the matter was more than 7 to 8 years old.
Ld D.R. fully justified the order of the CIT(A).
I find that the ld A.R. of the assessee failed to substantiate the source
of payment made through three five credit cards to the extent of
Rs.6,68,469/- before the lower authorities. No material was brought before
the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A) or even before me to show that
Rs.6,68,469/- paid through five credit cards was out of the explained
source of the assessee. In absence of the same, I find no good and
justifiable reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A), which is hereby
confirmed and ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
4 ITA No. 40/ CTK/2017 Asse ssment Year :20 09- 201 0
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26/05/2017 in the presence of parties. Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 26/05/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Pramod Kumar Bihari, Plot No.95/1287, Road No.II, Jagannth Nagar, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar. 2. The Respondent. ITO, Ward-4(3), Aayakar Bhavan, Rajaswa Vihar, Bhubaneswar 3. The CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-2, Bhubaneswar BY ORDER, 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY //True Copy// ITAT, Cuttack
5 ITA No. 40/ CTK/2017 Asse ssment Year :20 09- 201 0
Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on 23/05/17 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 23/05/17 (dictation Sr.PS pad has been enclosed along with original file) 3. Draft proposed & placed AM before the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved AM by Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to Sr.PS the Sr.PS/PS /PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 8. Date on which file goes to the H.C. 9. Date on which file goes to the SPS 10. Date of dispatch of Order.