Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: ARUN KHODPIA & ARUN KHODPIA & ARUN KHODPIA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.02/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ashok Ashok Agarwal, Agarwal, Power Power Vs. DCIT, DCIT, Rourkela Rourkela Circle, Circle, House Road, Rourkela House Road, Rourkela Rourkela PAN/GIR No. PAN/GIR No.AAXPA 8813 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.C.Sethi, AR P.C.Sethi, AR Revenue by : Shri A.C.Rout, Sr. : Shri A.C.Rout, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30 /9 9/2022 Date of Pronouncement : 30/9 9/2022 O R D E R Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), Sambalpur , Sambalpur dated 4.11.2019 in Appeal No. 0030/2015 0030/2015-16 for the assessment year assessment year 2012-13.
Shri P.C.Sethi, ld Shri P.C.Sethi, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri A.C.Rout, Sr AR appeared for the assessee and Shri A.C.Rout, Sr DR appeared for the revenue. DR appeared for the revenue.
It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee had filed his return of It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee had filed his return of It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee had filed his return of income for the relevant assessment year on 29.3.2013. It was the income for the relevant assessment year on 29.3.2013. It was the income for the relevant assessment year on 29.3.2013. It was the submission that the assessment came to submission that the assessment came to be completed u/s.143(3) on be completed u/s.143(3) on 30.3.2015, wherein, the Assessing Officer has made addition of 30.3.2015, wherein, the Assessing Officer has made addition of 30.3.2015, wherein, the Assessing Officer has made addition of
P a g e 1 | 5
ITA No.02/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2012-13
Rs.28,30,000/- by invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act. It was the submission that at the outset, the assessee’s income is only income from salary, income from house property and income from other sources. It was the submission that the assessee is not having any business income. It was the submission that Section 44AA requires the maintenance of books of account, if the assessee is having any income from business. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer had made the addition on the ground that the assessee has deposited Rs.40,30,000/- in his bank account with ICICI Bank. The deposits were on three dates i.e. on 12.3.2012 of Rs.80,000/-, on 28.3.2012 of Rs.9,50,000/- and on 31.3.2012 of Rs.30,00,000/-. The assessee replied that the assessee had opening cash balance of Rs.30,79,037/- as on 1.4.2011 and had also withdrawn Rs.3,00,000/- on 29.4.2011, Rs.4,00,000/- on 4.8.2011 and Rs.5,00,000/- on 27.9.2011. It was the submission that it was out of these funds, the deposits of Rs.40,30,000/- had been made. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer accepted the contention of the assessee in respect of cash withdrawal during the relevant assessment year of Rs.12,00,000/-. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer did not accept the contention of the assessee in respect of opening cash in hand of Rs.30,79,000/-. It was the submission that consequently, the Assessing Officer had made addition of Rs.28,30,000/- as unexplained cash deposits in the assessee’s bank
P a g e 2 | 5
ITA No.02/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2012-13
account. It was the submission that the ld CIT (A) had confirmed the same and the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
Ld A.R. drew our attention to the return for the assessment year 2010-2011, which was at page 6 of Paper Book, which shows cash in hand of Rs.27,79,037/-. It was the submission that for the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13, the returns do not provide for disclosure of cash in hand and consequently, the assessee was unable to provide the details of cash in hand in the returns. It was the submission that this cash in hand of Rs.27,79,037/- has not been disputed by the revenue nor any assessment has been made making any addition in respect of the same. It was the submission that as the disclosure in the return itself showed that the assessee is in the habit of holding cash in hand, the claim of the assessee of cash in hand of Rs.30,79,037/- is liable to be accepted. It was the prayer that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) be deleted.
In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that admittedly, the assessee has shown cash in hand in the assessment year 2010-2011 in his return but it is not in the nature of a prudent business man to hold cash in hand to such large amount. It was the submission that the assessee is a Director of the Company, having income from salary, income from house property and minor income under the head “other incomes” in the form of interest from bank deposits. It was the submission that the assessee has not been able P a g e 3 | 5
ITA No.02/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2012-13
to show with adequate evidence that the assessee was holding cash in hand as on 1.4.2011. ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A). It was the further submission that a second paper book has been filed enclosing copy of the return for the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012- 13. It was the submission that the paper book has been filed two days ago. It was the submission that as adequate time has not been given to the revenue, either the case be adjourned or the paper book should not be considered.
We have considered the rival submissions. Admittedly, the second paper book containing return for the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 has not been filed within the stipulated period. Consequently, the second paper book filed by the assessee is not admitted.
A perusal of paper book filed by the assessee on 28.12.2020 shows the copy of the income tax return for the assessment year 2010-2011. This is at page 6 of paper book. The said copy of return shows Rs.27,79,037/- in Column 6(d). The copy of the return for the assessment year 2011-12 is at page 26 of paper book. The said return does not admittedly have a column for the cash balance to be shown. However, the statement of computation of income is attached thereto and in the said statement of computation alongwith balance sheet, the cash in hand is shown at Rs.30,79,037/-. Admittedly, this return has not been taken up for scrutiny. The return is deemed to be accepted. Thus, the factum of holding cash in P a g e 4 | 5
ITA No.02/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2012-13
hand by the assessee during two immediately preceding assessment years has been proved. Therefore, the habit of the assessee in holding cash in hand stands accepted. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the explanation of the assessee that cash in hand of Rs.30,79,037/- is very much possible. Consequently, the addition as made by the AO and confirmed by ld CIT(A) stands deleted.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/9/2022.
Sd/- sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 30/9/2022 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Ashok Agarwal, Power House Road, Rourkela 2. The Respondent: DCIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela 3. The CIT(A)-, Sambalpur 4. Pr.CIT-, Sambalpur 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 5 | 5