Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Indore
Shri Shrikant Anjane, Harda vs The Ito -1, Itarsi on 30 March, 2017
Shrikant Anjane - ITA No.1319/Ind/2016 A.Y. 2006-07 Page 1 of 5 आयकरअपील यअ धकरण ,इ दौर यायपीठ ,इ दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE ी सी.एम.गग , या यकसद य तथा ीओ.पी.मीना ,लेखासद यकेसम# BEFORE SHRI C. M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं /.I.T.A. No. 1319/Ind/2016 नधा रणवष / Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shrikant Anjane vs. Income Tax Officer - 1 Village Gondagaon Itarsi Teh. Timarni Distt. Harda अपीलाथ /Appellant / यथ /Respondent / था.ले.सं./PAN: AIYPA - 2432N अपीलाथ क ओर से/Appellant by Shri Yashwant Sharma यथ क ओर से/Respondent by Shri Mohd. Javed - Sr. DR सुनवाई क तारीख/Date तारीख/ of hearing 30.03.2017 उ ोषणा क तारीख/Date तारीख/ of pronouncement 30.03.2017 आदेश /O / RDER PER O.P. MEENA, ACCOUTANT MEMEBR.
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-2, Bhopal [hereinafter referred to as the CIT (A)] dated 22.6.2016. This appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2006-07 as against appeal decided in respect of assessment order dated 30.8.2011 passed u/s. 144/147 of the Shrikant Anjane - ITA No.1319/Ind/2016 A.Y. 2006-07 Page 2 of 5 Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as "the Act") by the ITO Ward 3(1) Indore [hereinafter referred to as the "AO"].
1. The only ground taken by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,40,000/- made by the Assessing Officer by treating the same as undisclosed income of the assessee u/s 69 of the Act.
1.1 Succinctly, facts as culled out from the orders of lower authorities are that on the basis of AIR information the Assessing Officer found that the assessee had made investment of Rs. 7,30,000/- in Standard Chartered/HDFC Mutual Fund. As the assessee did not file any return of income, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 148 of the Act to file the same. However, the assessee did not file any return of income till the completion of assessment. During the course of assessment proceedings it was pleaded by the assessee that the assessee is an agriculturist and owner of 18 acres of land. He also submitted that he has no other source of income. It was also submitted that the investment of Rs.2,90,000/- was made by him out of his own agricultural income and further investment of Rs.4,40,000/- was made from the sums Shrikant Anjane - ITA No.1319/Ind/2016 A.Y. 2006-07 Page 3 of 5 received from his nephew, Shri Arun Anjane. The assessee also produced before the Assessing Officer receipts from Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti in support of the agricultural income. In view of this, the Assessing Officer treated the investment of Rs.2,90,000/- as explained. Since the assessee failed to give any satisfactory explanation regarding the sum of Rs. 4,40,000/- as also failed to produce Shri Arun Anjane, the Assessing Officer rejected the explanation of the assessee. Accordingly, the investment in Mutual Fund to the tune of Rs.4,40,000/- was held to be unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act.
1.2 Having felt with the above addition made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee went in appeal before the learned CIT(A). On consideration of the facts of the case and the submissions of the assessee, the learned CIT(A) did not find any force in the appeal and dismissed the same.
1.3 Against dismissal of appeal by the learned CIT(A), the assessee has approached the Tribunal by filing the present appeal. 1.4 Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee received the amount of Rs.4,40,000/- by account payee cheques from his nephew, Shri Arun Anjane. In support of Shrikant Anjane - ITA No.1319/Ind/2016 A.Y. 2006-07 Page 4 of 5 this, the assessee has filed a copy of certificate from Shri Arun Anjane (paper book page 10) stating that he gave an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and Rs.1,90,418/- by cheque no. 0014396 and 0014397 dated 19.7.2005 and 3.11.2005 to the assessee. Therefore, the authorities below were not justified in making the confirming the addition in question. On the other hand, the learned DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 1.5 After hearing both the sides, we find that the only grievance of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee has failed to prove as to in which form the assessee has received the sum, in question, from Shri Arun Anjane. The Assessing Officer has also observed that the assessee did not produce Shri Arun Anjane before the Assessing Officer to prove his creditworthiness. Further, the copy of certificate as filed before us was not filed before the Assessing Officer. Further the cash flow statement was also not filed before the Assessing Officer. We are, therefore, of the view that it would be just and proper to set aside the orders of the authorities below and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer. We, therefore, remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to frame the assessment de novo after providing due opportunity of Shrikant Anjane - ITA No.1319/Ind/2016 A.Y. 2006-07 Page 5 of 5 hearing to the assessee. At the same time, we also direct the assessee to produce Shri Arun Anjane before the Assessing Officer as and when required to prove his case and also necessary evidence in support of his claim.
2. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
3. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th March, 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
(सी.एम.गग ) (ओ.पी.मीना)
याियक सद य लेखा सद य
(C.M.GARG) (O.P.MEENA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
March 30, 2017
Dn/-