N.R.ELANGO,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

आदेश / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

ITA No.2135/Mds/2015 :- 2 -:

2012-2013 passed u/s.143(3) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’).

support of deposits with name and address of the clients in the assessment proceedings. Since the advances are reflected in the books of accounts and no satisfactory explanation was offered, the Assessing Officer completed assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act by adding bank credits as unexplained deposits alongwith other disallowance and assessed total income. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) perused the findings of the Assessing Officer and written submissions filed on 28.10.2015. The assessee has explained the aggregate advances of �16,00,000/- received from clients with cheque details. The assessee being an Advocate received advances amount from clients for services to be rendered in future. Such advance are shown as liability to be adjusted against services to be rendered. The ld. Authorised Representative relied on the decision of Delhi Bench Tribunal in the case of K.K. Khullar (2009) 116 ITD 301 and also Jurisdictional Tribunal decision in the case of R.S. Suriya vs. DCIT in & 597/Mds/2009 and substantiated his arguments that the Assessing

ITA No.2135/Mds/2015 :- 4 -:

Officer has made addition as the explanations furnished by the assessee are not satisfactory. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) verified the Bank account credits and presumed that assessee has not explained or furnished details in the assessment proceedings or in the appellate proceedings and distinguished the judicial decision cited by the assessee. Further assessee could not furnish confirmation of primary details of name, address and pan numbers of the clients who have advanced the money. With these observations the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) concurred with the findings of the Assessing Officer and confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee assailed an appeal before Tribunal.

ITA No.2135/Mds/2015 :- 5 -: of assessee supporting deposits with material evidence. In appellate proceedings, the ld. Authorised Representative explained the sources with written submission dated 28.10.2015 but ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has distinguished the facts and decisions relied by the assessee and concurred with the findings of the Assessing Officer. The ld. Authorised Representative submitted that there is no suppression of income as the amount was offered to the Income Tax in subsequent years and produced statement of schedule of advance fees with details of bank account, name of clients, bank branch and cheque no’s to substantiate the credit routed in bank account and establishment of identity with information of banks and prayed for deletion of addition by Assessing Officer in assessment proceedings.

clients/party, fees amounts, Bank account details to substantiate the grounds of offering income in future. The advance fee received by the Advocate cannot be treated as income for the relevant assessment year, even if the assessee is maintaining his books of accounts under cash system of Accounting. Therefore, we herein direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of advance fee received by assessee from clients subject to verification that advance fee received is offered as income in subsequent years or returned or if still remain as advance.