Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Ismailbhai Savadibhai Hira, Ahmedabad vs Income Tax Officer,Ward-11(1),, ... on 29 May, 2017
आयकर अपील
य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ ',l-
,l-,e-
,e-lh', अहमदाबाद ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
" SMC " BENCH, AHMEDABAD
सव ी एन.के. ब लैया, लेखा सद य एवं महावीर साद, या यक सद य के सम ।
BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And
SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.472/Ahd/2012
( नधा रण वष / Assessment Year :2008-09)
Ismailbhai Savadibhai Hira, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer
C-6, Akar Appartments, Vs. Ward-11(1),
Rajnagar Road, Ahmedabad.
Paldi, Ahmedabad-380007
थायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . / PAN/GIR No. : ABGPH 0488 J
(अपीलाथ' /Appellant) .. ( (यथ' / Respondent)
अपीलाथ' ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Pritesh Shah, A.R.
(यथ' क* ओर से/Respondent by : Shri P.S. Choudhary, Sr.D.R.
ु वाई क* तार.ख /
सन Date of Hearing 09/03/2017
घोषणा क* तार.ख /Date of Pronounce ment 29/05/2017
आदे श / O R D E R
PER SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-XVI, Ahmedabad, dated 15/12/2011 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09.
2. Assessee has taken the following Ground of appeal:
The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by AO of Rs.29,13,897/- as an unexplained investment under section 69 of the IT Act, 1961, which is requested to be deleted.ITA No.472/Ahd/2012
Ismailbhai Savadibhai Hira vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2008-09 -2-
3. The relevant facts as culled out from the materials on record are as under:-
It was noticed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee had deposited huge cash of Rs.29,13,897/- in his account maintained in the Memon Co. Operative Bank Ltd, Ahmedabad. The appellant was asked to explain the source of cash of deposits of Rs.29,13,897/- (Rs.8,87,621/- + Rs. 20,00,000/- + Rs. 25,000/-) made in the aforesaid Bank account. The appellant had contended before the Assessing Officer that the amounts were received in cash for various relatives who are agriculturists and are residing at Mehsana Districts. He had stated to be received 3,00,000/- each in cash on 05/04/2007 from nine such relatives totaling to Rs.27,00,000/-, who paid it to the assessee i.e. their uncle Shri Ismailbhai Savadibhai Hira. The Assessing Officer had issued summons u/s. 131 of the Act to the said nine persons out of which only two persons had attended and statements of whom were recorded u/s. 131 of the Act on 29/11/2010.
On verification of the statements recorded, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that the concerned persons could not furnish any evidence to establish that crops were cultivated the land and the same were sold in the market. They had only filed the 7/12 extracts. They have not filed any evidence regarding purchase of seeds, sale of agriculture produce, amount received in cash and expenditure incurred. They have contended that they are not maintaining any bank account in ITA No.472/Ahd/2012 Ismailbhai Savadibhai Hira vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2008-09 -3- their names. It was stated that the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was saved by them over a period of time and given to Shri Ismail Hira in cash during the year under consideration. The assessee had not furnished the books of accounts including cash book wherein the transactions were recorded. Under the circumstances, the cash deposit in the bank account was considered as unexplained income u/s.69 of the Act. Even none appeared in response to the show cause notice issued to be heard on 16/12/2010. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and considering the inability of the assessee to prove the source of cash deposits made in the bank account with satisfactory and supporting evidence, the amount of cash deposits to the extent of Rs.29,13,897/- was treated as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act and the same was added to the total income of the assessee.
4. Against the said order assessee preferred first statutory appeal before the learned CIT(A) but to no avail and learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
5. Now assessee has filed appeal before us.
6. In this case, learned AR submitted that land revenue record showing ownership of land which was furnished before the Lower Authority and agriculture products sales Bills were also submitted and Stamp paper were purchased at the time of making affidavit but same were not considered by the authorities below. In the interest of the justice ITA No.472/Ahd/2012 Ismailbhai Savadibhai Hira vs. ITO Asst.Year - 2008-09 -4- we remit this matter back to the file of the CIT(A) who will verify the documents which has been filed before the authorities below and will decide the matter afresh after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the light of the above discussions we allow the appeal for statistical purpose.
7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on 29/05/2017
Sd/- Sd/-
एन.के. ब लैया महावीर साद
(लेखा सद य) ( या यक सद य)
( N.K. BILLAIYA ) ( MAHAVIR PRASAD )
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad; Dated 29/05/2017
Priti Yadav, Sr. PS
आदे श क त"ल#प अ$े#षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ' / The Appellant
2. (यथ' / The Respondent.
3. संबं6धत आयकर आयु8त / Concerned CIT
4. आयकर आय8
ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-XVI, Ahmeabad
5. 9वभागीय त न6ध, आयकर अपील.य अ6धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad
6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.
आदे शानुसार/ BY ORDER, स(या9पत त //True Copy// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad True Copy