Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh
Sh. Suresh Singla, Panchkula vs Acit, Chandigarh on 31 July, 2019
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ "बी ", च डीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
CHANDIGARH BENCH 'B' , CHANDIGARH
ीमती दवा संह, याय!क सद"य एवं ीमती अ नपण
ू ा& गु(ता, लेखा सद"य
BEFORE SMT.DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2009-10
Shri Suresh Singla, बनाम The A.C.I.T.,
# 1332, Sector 4, Central Circle-II,
Panchkula. Chandigarh.
थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ABUPC8259J
अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent
नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Adv.
राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by: Shri G.S.Phani Kishore,CIT DR)
सन
ु वाई क तार$ख/Date of Hearing : 17.07.2019
उदघोषणा क तार$ख/Date of Pronouncement: 31.07.2019
आदे श/ORDER
Per Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member:
Th i s a pp e a l ha s b ee n pre fe rre d by the a s se s se e a ga in st the or de r of th e C ommi s s ion e r of I ncome Ta x (A pp e a ls )( Ce n tr a l) , G ur ga on [( i n sh or t 'C I T( A ) '] d ate d 25 . 9. 2 0 13 , p a s se d u/ s 2 50 ( 6 ) of th e I nc ome Ta x A ct, 1 9 6 1 (h e re i n a fte r re fe rr e d to a s 'Ac t') .
2 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10
2. B r i e f fa c ts re l a ting to t he ca se a re th a t a se a rc h u/s 13 2 ( 1) of t he Ac t was con du c te d on 1 6. 1 .2 0 0 9 at t he re si de n ce s a n d of fi ce s of the in d iv i du a ls a n d gr ou p con ce r ns of M /s A .P . Sh r e s tha (G oya l ) G r oup , w hi ch i ncl ud e d the a sse sse e a l so. The a s se sse e w a s e nga ge d in th e bus in e s s of pr op e r t y con sul ta n t a n d e a rn e d com mi ss i on i nc o me b e si de s Long Te r m C a p i t a l G a i ns. P ost se a r ch a c ti on, a sse ssme nt wa s f r a me d on t he a sse ssee u /s 1 5 3 A re a d w i th se cti on 14 3 ( 3) of th e Ac t for the i mp ugn e d ye a r , ma k in g va r i ous a dd i ti ons on a c cou nt of un e xp l a i ne d ca s h credit and un e xp la ine d e xpen d itu r e .
3. Th e a ss e ss ee fi led a n a p pe a l to th e C I T( A) , w h o i n t ur n up he ld the o rde r of th e AO .
4. Ag gr i e ve d b y the sa me , th e a sse ssee ha s n ow come u p in a p p e a l be fore u s.
5. G r oun d N os. 1 a nd 2, it wa s p oi nte d out, w ere in te r re l a te d . Th e s a me r e a d a s u nd e r :
1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the addition of Rs.20,00,000/- made on the basis of certain figures mentioned on Page 2 of Annexure A-5 applying the provisions of Section 68 of the Act which is arbitrary and unjustified.3 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10
2. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the invocation of the provisions of Section 68 in as much as the pocket diary in not a book of account which can be made the basis for making of an addition of cash credit and as such the addition upheld isarbitrary and unjustified.
6. I n the a b ove gr oun d s the a s se s se e ha s ch a l le nged t he a cti on of t he Ld. C I T( A) i n up hol d i ng t he a dd i ti on ma d e of Rs. 20 l a cs on a c cou nt of a n e n tr y no te d in a d ocu me n t, An ne x ure A -5 ,by a p pl yi n g th e pr ovi s ion s o f s e ction 6 8 of the A ct.
7. B r i e f fa c ts r e la t in g t o th e i ss ue a re th a t a d i ar y w a s se i ze d f r om t he r e s ide nce of th e a sse ssee , re fe r re d to a s doc ume nt A-5 . O n p a g e 2 o f t h i s d i a r y t he AO n ote d, w a s wr i tte n "2 00 0 pr of i t b a l a nc e a ft e r ma r r i a ge Chi tr a ". He fu rt he r note d tha t i n th e st a te me nt r e cor de d o f t he a sse ssee on 2 1 .1 . 20 0 9 he wa s a sk e d a b out the sa me to w h i ch t he a sse sse e re p l ie d th a t i t re la te d to Rs. 2 0 l a cs a mo un t sa ve d a fte r the ma r ri a ge of C hi tr a . Th e A O the re a fte r a sk e d t he a sse sse e to f i le hi s e x pl a n a ti on r e g a r di n g the ma r r ia g e of C hi ttr a a n d pr of i t of Rs. 20 l a cs , t o wh i ch the a ss ess ee f i le d de ta i le d e xpl a n a ti on b r in gi n g out th e r el a ti ons hi p of C h it ra to him as b e i ng d a ug hte r of h is b r oth e r -i n-la w , w h ose ma rr i a ge he h a d sol e mn i ze d si nce b ot h he r pa re nts h a d d ie d 20 ye a r s a go a n d th e a moun t de p ic te d t he b a l a nc e re ma in i ng 4 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 out o f s ha gu n co l le cte d a nd a f te r i nc ur r i ng e xp e nse s d ur i ng he r ma r ri a ge . Th e AO fu rt he r no te d t ha t w he n the a s se s se e 's a tte n ti on w a s d ra w n t o th e sta t eme n t giv e n d u ri n g s e a r ch, on 2 1. 1 .2 0 0 9 , the a s se s se e re p li e d b y s ta ti ng th a t Rs. 2 0 la c s r e fl e cte d h is c om mis si on in co me e a rne d du r ing the ye a r wh i ch wa s re f le cte d in h is re tu rn of in co me . Th e AO the re a fte r n ote d t ha t the r e p lie s of th e a s ses se e we re con tr a d ic tor y and he l d th a t si n ce t he a sse ssee in his sta te me n t h a d ad mi tte d the a mou nt a s r e p re se nt in g tha t sa ve d a f te r ma rr i a ge of C h i tr a f r om a l l s our ce s a nd s i nce t he a sse sse e h a d n ot f i le d de t a il s of ma r r ia g e e xpe n se s a n d t he sou rc e s fr om wh i ch th e y we re me t, th e a mou n t of Rs .2 0 l a cs wa s a d d e d a s une xp l a ine d ca sh cr e d i t u /s 6 8 of th e Ac t.
8. B e f ore the Ld .C I T(A ) th e a sse s see re ite r a te d h is con te n ti ons , a f ter con si d e r i ng w h ic h th e Ld .C I T( A ) up h e l d the or de r of th e AO ho ld i ng a t p a r a 5 . 3 of h i s or de r a s un de r :
5.3. I have considered the submissions of the assessee and the impugned order. The dairy A-5 was seized from the residence. Ownership is not in dispute. Page 2 of the diary was stated to be Rs. 20 lakhs saved after the marriage of "Chitra". This statement u/s 132(4) was later changed to earnings from commission during AY 2009-10 and duly reflected in the return. A scanned copy is placed at page two of the impugned order. On the other hand the assessee has contended that the diary did not constitute books of 5 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 accounts so as to be hit by section 68. It was also argued that the addition was made solely on the ground that there had been contradictory statements and that the figures were petty expenses.
On a perusal of the scanned copy it is evident that against the figure 20.0 0 the narration is profit balance after marriage Chitra. The marriage of Chitra is not in dispute. On the same page there are some other figures viz. 2.50 'bua' 3.75 'maa' 1.85' jony' ......Hence it is very clear that the figure is relating to marriage. The contention that the figures are petty expenses cannot be given credence as 3.75 'maa' cannot by any stretch of imagination be said to be Rs.375/- only.
The argument that the diary does not constitute books is also not tenable. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs Sonal Constructions, 260 CTR 377 [2013] has held at para 16 that it is not necessary that the seized documents should be in the form of proper books of accounts so that they can be relied upon for the purpose of making additions. They could be in any form, including loose papers on which notings or scribblings have been made. Moreover, if assesses changes his explanatory statement at a later stage, then he has the extra burden of substantiating the same. Thus considering the aforesaid and in the absence of assessee satisfactorily clarifying the position, I am inclined to hold that there is no infirmity in the stand of the AO. Hence, the addition of Rs. 20,00,000/- is sustained."
9. B e f ore u s the Ld . C oun se l f or the a sse ssee c onten de d tha t th e a dd i ti on ma d e w a s n o t j u sti fi e d si nce time a n d a ga i n i t h a d bee n s ub mi tte d t o th e Re ve nue A uthor i ti e s t hat the a mou nt of Rs .2 0 l a cs r e p r e se nte d t he sa v in gs ma d e a fte r sol e mn iz a ti on of ma r r ia g e o f C hi tr a a n d w h ic h ha d b e e n a cce pte d b y the Re ve n ue A ut hor iti e s a l so a n d such re ce i p ts we re n ot i n t he na t ur e of i nc ome . The Ld. C ou ns e l for the a sse sse e f ur the r con te n de d th a t th e re w a s n o b a si s f or 6 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 tr e a ti ng the a mo un t me nt ion e d a s t wo th ous a nd s a s Rs. 2 0 la c s. It was fu rt he r c on te n ded th a t no cor r ob or a ti ve e vi de n ce i n the for m of ca s h or oth e r w i se w a s f ound d ur i ng se a r c h for the a l le ge d su rp l us c a sh w i th the a s se sse e . I t w a s con te n de d th a t th e a dd i ti on ma d e ne e de d to be de le te d . 10 . Th e Ld. D R re b utt e d b y p oi n ti ng ou t th a t the a sse ssee hi mse l f in hi s s ta te me n t re cor de d on 2 1 .1 .2 0 0 9 w he n a ske d to e x pl a i n R s. 20 w r i tte n i n An ne xur e -5 , h a s re s pond e d by sa yi ng tha t th i s w a s Rs .2 0 l a c s s a ve d a f te r th e ma r r ia g e of C hi tr a . H e , th e ref or e , s ta te d t ha t i t w a s th e a ss e ss ee 's ow n a dmi ss io n of th e f i gur e re p re se ntin g Rs .2 0 l a cs and n ot a fi gme n t of ima g i n a ti on of th e Rev e nue . Th e Ld. D R fu r the r sta te d tha t the a ss e ssee 's c ontin uou s i n con si ste nt sta n d vi s-a -v is th is issu e j us ti fie d the a dd i ti on. Th e Ld . DR con te n de d th a t when th e s ta te me n t was re cor d e d a f te r se a r c h a nd i n v a ri ou s le tte r s s ub mit te d d u r in g a sse ssme nt pr oc ee d i ng s, the a sse ssee had sta t e d the amou nt to re p re se nt the s avi ng a ft e r the ma r ri a ge of C h it ra , l a te r on the a sse s see ha d r e tr a c te d wh e n c onf r onte d w i th h is sta te me n t ma de on 2 1 .1 . 2 00 9 b y sta t in g th a t th e sa me re p re se nte d t he c om mi ssi on in co me e a r ne d b y hi m a n d it wa s d u ly d i sc los e d in hi s r etu r n of i nc ome . Th e Ld . D R, 7 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 the re fo re , c onte nde d t ha t t hi s i ncons i ste n cy in the sta n d of the a ss e ssee s howe d tha t he w a s h id i ng so me thi n g fr om t he Re ve nue Au tho riti e s a n d , the re fo re , ju st if ie d the add i ti on ma de .
11 . W e h a ve he a r d th e r i va l co nte ntion s a nd p e r u se d t he or de r s of t he a uthor i ti e s be l ow . The i ssu e re la te s to a d di ti on ma de o n a cc oun t of n oti ngs i n t he d ocu me n t An ne xure A -5 of fi gu r e 20 0 0 w i th t he n a rr a t ion a ga i ns t i t "p r ofi t ba la n ce a fte r ma r r i a ge C h it r a ". The a sse ssee h a d c on ten d e d tha t the se we re t he s ur p l us r e ma i n in g fr om s ha gu n a n d o the r col le cti on s d ur i ng ma r ri a ge of h i s b ro the r -in -l a w 's d a ug hte r C hi tr a . The f a ct of ma r r i a ge of Ch itr a a nd th a t the fi gu res re la te d to th e ma r ri a ge of C hi tr a h a s, w e f in d , be en a c ce p te d by th e CI T( A) , w hi ch f in d s me n tio n in h is f in d i ngs a t p a r a
5. 3 of th e o rd e r r e p r odu ce d a b ove w he re i n t he Ld .C I T(A ) ha s ca te g or ic a ll y stat e d th a t "i t i s v e ry c l e ar th a t th e f igu re is rel ati n g to marr i age" . H a vi n g a cc e p te d tha t the a mou nt re p re se nte d s ur pl us col le cti on s by w a y of s ha g un, e tc. on the occa s i on of ma r r ia g e of C h i tr a , w e f a i l to un de r sta n d how the s a me c an b e tre a te d to be in the n a ture of i nc ome of the a s se s se e . Th e a moun ts col l e cte d b y w a y of g ifts on t he occa s i on of ma r r i a g e d o no t p a r tak e the c ha r a c te r of i nc ome . 8 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10 Th e con te n ti on of th e Re ve nue be f ore us th a t the a d di ti on wa s w a r r a n te d on a cco un t of t he i nc ons i ste n t stan d of t he a sse sse e cl a imi ng th e a moun t to r e p re se nt the re ce i p ts on the occ a si on of ma r r i a ge a n d su bs e q ue n tly cl a i mi n g i t to b e hi s com mi ss io n i nc ome , d oe s not i n o ur vi e w a lt e r or ma k e a ny d i ff e re n ce t o our fi n d in gs a bov e . Th e re a s on b e i ng tha t fi r stl y ,b e f ore us , th e a s se sse e ha s a c ce p te d th a t the a mou nt re p re se nte d t he col l e cti on s f rom ma r r ia g e , w h i ch is cor r ob or a te d b y t he con te n ts of t he not in gs a ls o, the re f ore , hi s oth e r s ta nd t a ke n s ub se q ue ntl y is i r re le va nt. Al so me r e l y be c a use t he a sse ssee is i nc ons is ten t in hi s e xp la na ti on d oe s not if so f ac to a n d on i ts ow n a l on e le a d to the con cl us io n th a t a pa r ti cu l a r noti n g r e p res e n ts the in come of th e a s se sse e . The r e h a s to b e some ma te r i a l on re cor d , mor e i mpo rt a ntl y, i n th e a bs e n ce of a n y e xp la n a ti on by th e a sse ssee , t o f or m t he b a s i s of ma k in g the a d d it ion . We , t he re fo re , do no t f in d a ny me r i t i n th e a r gu men ts o f t he Re ve nue .
I n vie w of th e a bo ve , w e se t asi d e the o rde r of t he Ld. C I T( A) h ol di n g th e a mo un t of R s .2 0 l a cs in d oc u me n t A -5 a s th e i nc ome of the a sse ssee d i r e ct in g de le tion of t he a dd i ti on so ma d e .
9 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10 Th e gr oun d s of appeal N os. 1 a n d 2 r a ise d by t he a sse sse e a re , ther e f ore , a ll owe d .
12 . G r oun d N o. 3 r a i se d b y the a s se s se e re a d s a s u nde r :
1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has further erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the addition of Rs.71,600/- made on the basis of certain figures mentioned on Annexure A-4 applying the provisions of Section 68 of the Act which is arbitrary and unjustified.
13 . Th e is sue ra i se d in t he a b ov e gr oun d re la tes to a dd i ti on ma d e o n a cc oun t o f n o ti n g i n doc u me nt A-4 . The con te n ts of the sa me o n th e b asi s of w hi ch a dd i ti on w a s ma de a r e a s un de r :
5 1 5=0 0 Mu ke sh L . G. 1 0 0=0 0 Su resh P a ti a a 1 7 . 12 . 2 00 8 1 =4 0 Rav i 1 7 . 1 2. 2 0 08 1 0 0=0 0 Fro m ji wan 1 7. 1 2 .2 0 0 8
14 . D ur i ng th e a s ses sme n t pr oc ee d ing s, th e a s se s se e w a s a sk e d to e xp l a in th e sa me . He st a te d th a t th e sa me pe r ta ine d to house hol d e xpe n se s in cu r re d on 17 . 12 . 2 00 8 . wi th Rs .5 5 0 /- b e i n g i n cur re d on TV r e p a ir , Rs .10 0 /- g iv e n to on e S h ri S ur e sh P a ti a la , Rs .1 4 0 gi ve n to Ra v i a n d Rs .1 0 0 giv e n to Ji w a n. Th e A O re je cte d t he e xp l a na ti on of t he a sse sse e f or the re a son th a t in h is sta te me n t ma d e on 21 . 1. 2 0 09 th e a s se s se e ha d s ub mi tte d th a t th e d ia r y 10 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 con ta i ne d de t a ils o f i nv e s tme n t ma d e b y h im wr i tte n in sma l l a l p ha b e ts a n d nu me r a l s. He , the re fore , mu lti p l ie d t he sa i d f ig ur e b y 10 0 b r i ngi n g the tota l su m o f th e p age to Rs. 71 , 6 00 /- a dd i ng b a ck t he sa me to the i nc ome o f t he a sse sse e a s u ne xp la i n e d ca sh cr ed i t u/s 68 of t h e A ct. The Ld. C I T( A) up he ld the or de r of the AO .
15 . B e f ore u s the Ld . C oun se l f or the a sse ssee c onten de d tha t d ue e xp la na ti on had been gi ve n of th e fi gu r e s as re p re se nti n g hi s h ou se h ol d e xpe nse s ti me a n d a ga i n a n d he fu rt he r c on te n ded th a t th e r e w as no b a s is fo r mu l tip l yi ng the f ig ure s b y 1 00.
16 . Th e Ld . D R, on t he othe r han d , s ta te d t ha t t he a sse sse e i n hi s ow n s ta te me nt had a d mi tte d t o the f a ct t hat the f ig ure of 2 0 me nti on e d in doc ume nt A-5 w a s in f a ct Rs. 20 l a cs and by h is ow n ad mis si on th e figu r e s we re me nt ion e d i n d oc ume nt A -5 we re w r it te n in sma l l a lp h a b e ts a nd n ume r a ls . A c cor d in gl y, t he L d . D R j us ti fi e d the a c tio n of the A O in mu l ti p l yi ng th e fi gure s wi th 1 0 0 . Th e Ld . DR fu rt he r re l ie d up on th e or de r s of the a u th or it ie s be low poi n ti ng ou t t he r e fr om tha t th e a d di ti on w a s j us tif i e d f or t he re a son th a t the a s se s se e ha d h i mse l f a dmi tt e d in hi s sta te me n t re cord e d on 21 . 1 .2 00 9 t ha t th e c onte nt s of 11 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 doc ume nt A-4 w e r e de t a il s of i nvest me nt ma d e by h im a nd i f he now w i she d to r e tr a ct t he same the onu s t o p r ove t he re tr a cti on l a y comp le te l y on th e a s se s se e w h ic h ha d not be e n d one in t he p r e se nt c a se .
17 . W e h a ve he a r d the r iv a l con te n tion s a n d ha ve c a re fu l ly gon e thr ou gh th e d ocu me n ts a n d su b mis si ons r e fe rre d to be fore u s. I t i s no t d i sp ute d th a t th e a d d i ti on ha s be e n ma de on a c cou nt of n oti ng s i n a doc ume nt, A nnex ur e A-4 , a s r e p r od uce d a b ov e . The Re v e nue , we fi n d, h a s he a v i ly re lie d up on th e s ub mi ssi on s made by th e a sse ssee on 21 . 1. 2 0 09 f or m a k in g th e a d d i tion s ta ti ng tha t the a sse ssee in h is s ta te me nt ha d a d mitt e d to th e f a ct th a t t he n oti ngs i n the i mp ugn e d docume nt r e l a te d to th e in ve stme n t ma d e by hi m i n s ma l l a l p h a b e ts a n d n umer a l s. W e ha ve gon e t hr ou gh the s ta te me nt re cor d e d by the a sse s se e on 2 1 .1 .20 0 9 , cop y of w hi c h w a s fi l e d b e fo re us i n th e P a pe r B ook fi l e d by t he a sse sse e a t p a ge N os. 5 to 9 . O n goi ng thr ou gh th e sa me we fi nd th a t the re le v a nt q ue s ti on on th e b a s is of w h ic h t he Re ve nue h a s b u il t i ts ca se is q ue sti on N o. 6 a nd r e sp on se of the a s se s se e t o the sa me w h ic h i s re p ro du ce d he reu nd e r :
"6. T e ll u s abou t R s. 2 0 wr i tte n in An n ex ure -5 Page -1 of se iz ed d oc u men ts?12 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10 R. T h is i s R s. 20 l ak h s a s s av ed a mo un t af ter th e marr i ag e of ' Ch i tra' f r om al l so ur ces wr i t ten in s mal l d i ar y an d i s f u rthe r ro tated a s in ve stm en ts wi th var iou s in d iv id u al s wr i t ten in sm al l al ph a b e ts an d n u mer al s in my o th er se ize d t wo d iar i es and re st of th e amou n t wr i tten is ag ain st h ou seh ol d d a i l y ex pe n se s wh ic h my wif e an d c h il d ren u sed to in cu r on da il y b a si s. "
18 . O n goi n g thr ou gh the s a me a vi ta l f a ct w h ic h e me rge s is tha t th e q u e stion r a i se d to th e a ss e s see w a s v is -à -vi s t he noti n g i n do cum e nt A-5 a n d not d ocu me n t A-4 , on th e b a si s of w h i ch the a dd it ion h a s be e n ma d e i n the p rese nt ca se. Th e r e p l y of the a ss e s see a ls o i s a cc or d in gl y on the not in gs in d ocu me n t A-5 a n d a p e r us a l o f th e s a me r e ve a ls t ha t t he a sse sse e h a d e xp l a in e d the noti n gs i n d ocu me nt A-5 a s be in g Rs. 2 0 re p re se nt in g Rs. 2 0 l acs sa v e d a f te r the ma rr i a ge of C h itr a and w hi ch a moun t was f ur th e r in ve ste d w i th va r io us in d iv id u a ls w r it te n i n s ma l l a l p h a be ts a nd n ume ra l s in oth e r se i ze d dia r i e s a n d the res t of th e a mo un t i s a g a in st the h ou se h ol d da i l y e xpe n se s. Th i s sta t e me n t, we fi nd , is a ge ne r a l st a te me nt a b out the n oti ng s i n th e o the r d ia ri e s a n d sta te s th a t the not in gs i n ot he r di a r ie s re p re se nt s b oth t he in ve s tme n ts a nd hou se hol d e x pe nse s. Th e a sse ssee ha s a ttr i bu te d t he no tin gs i n d oc um e n t A -4 to be rep r e se n ti ng hou se h ol d e xpe nse s wh i le t he R eve nue ha s tr e a te d th e m a s in ve s tme n t. We fin d tha t th e o nl y re a son f or the Rev e n ue for 13 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 tr e a ti ng t he s a m e a s in ve stme nt i s the sta te me nt giv e n by the a s se s se e a s r e p r od uce d a b ove . B u t a s not e d a bo ve , t he sta te me n t d oe s not s a y t ha t the not in gs i n oth e r di a r ies re p re se nts on ly th e i nve s tme n t ma d e by th e a s se s se e . The a sse sse e h a s sta te d th a t th e y a ls o r e p re se n ts h ou se h old e xpe n se s. Th e r e for e , thi s i nte r p re ta ti on o f the Re ve n ue i s ba s e d on i nc or rect a p p r e c ia ti on of th e f a cts ; Mor eov e r e ven if th e sa i d fi gu res a r e sa i d to re p re se nt the i n ve s tme n t ma d e by th e a sse ssee , th e sta te me n t its e l f cle a r l y b ri ngs ou t t he sou rc e of the in ve stme nt a s be i ng ma de fr om th e s a vi ng s of Rs. 20 l a cs a ft e r t he ma r r ia g e of C h itr a . Th is s u m of Rs .2 0 la c s, w e ha ve h eld i n gr ou nd N o.1 & 2 a b ove to b e n ot in t he na tu r e of t he i ncome o f th e a sse ssee . F ur the r th e sou rce ha v in g sto od e xp la i n e d , we see n o r e a son fo r ma k i ng t he a dd i ti on of th e s a me on th e gr ou n d of u ne x pl a i ne d in ve s tme n t ma d e b y th e a sse ssee .
C on si d e r i ng the tota l it y of f a ct s a nd c ir c umst a nc e s of the ca se , t he re for e , we h ol d tha t the a d di ti on ma de on a ccou nt of n oti n gs i n do cume nt A- 4 d e se r ve s t o be d e le te d .
G r oun d of a pp e a l N o .3 r a i se d by t he a sse ssee is a ccor d i ng ly a l lo we d .
14 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10 19 . G r oun d N o. 4 r a i se d b y the a s se s se e re a d s a s u nde r :
1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the invocation of the provisions of Section 68 in as much as the pocket diary in not a book of account which can be made the basis for making of an addition of cash credit and as such the addition upheld is arbitrary and unjustified.
20 . The a b ov e gr ou nd w a s n ot p r e s se d be f ore us a n d t he sa me is t re a te d as d is mis se d .
21 . G r oun d N os .5 , 6 a nd 7 r a i se d by t he a sse s see , i t w a s con te n de d we re i nt e r -re l a te d be i n g r a ise d on a cc oun t of a dd i ti on ma d e o n noti n gs ma d e i n An n e xu re A -6 . Th e sa i d gr oun d s ra i se d as u nd e r :
" 5 .That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the addition of Rs.20,65,692/- made on the basis of certain figures mentioned on Pages 16-34 of Annexure A-6 applying the provisions of Section 69- C of the Act which is arbitrary and unjustified.
6. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax(Appeals) has further erred in rejecting the application for admission of additional evidence which is arbitrary and unjustified.
7. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax(Appeals) has failed to consider the contention of the assessee that there was a double addition of Rs.8,05,677/- in as much as same entries appearing on two different documents have been added twice over which is arbitrary and unjustified"
22 . B r i e f ly st a te d , the f a cts of the c a se a re th a t in t he cou rs e of se a rc h ce rt a in d oc ume nts w e re f oun d . Anne xure A- 6 P a ge 1 6 t o 3 4 con ta i ne d b i ll s of e xpe nse s of h ou se h ol d 15 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 good s. Th e a s ses se e v ide q ue stion na i r e d a te d 26 .1 1 .2 0 1 0 wa s a sk e d to e xp l a in the s our ces of the se e x pe ns e s . The a sse sse e f a ile d to e x pl a i n the s our ce s of exp e n se s of Rs. 20 , 6 5, 6 9 2/-, the de t a il s of w h ic h a r e give n a s und e r :
Sr.No. Page No. Name of the party Description Date Amount item
1. 16 Pooja Saree Saree 6.6.2008 8600
2. 17 Dipira Saree Suit & Saree 6.6.2008 11295
3. 18 -do- -do- 6.6.2008 12915
4. 19 -do- -do- 6.6.2008 12665
7. 23 Jewellery 12.12.2008 653845
11. 35 -do- 16.7.2008 296195
12. 25 & 26 -do- 12.12.2008 177000
13. 27 -do- 12.12.2008 22059
14. 28 -do- 60000
15. 29 -do- 624500
16. 32 -do- 186618 Total 20,65,692/-
23. The assessee explained that bills at page Nos.25 & 26 belonged to his daughter, page No.28 belonged to Aarti, his daughter, Page No.35 was a estimate, page No.29 belonged to Smt.Suman and Aarti. However, the assessee had failed to furnish any evidence that these expenses were actually incurred by his daughters. As the assessee had failed to explain the sources of these expenses, it was held that the assessee had incurred these expenses from undisclosed sources. Therefore, the AO treated the expenses of Rs.20,65,692/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. 16 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10
24. Before the Ld.CI T(A) the assessee requested for admission of additional evidence in the form of two affidavits of the daughter of the assessee and of the son-in-law of the assessee stating on oath that the bills found during the course of search and forming part of Annexure A-6, belonged to them and that they were regular income tax assessees. The assessee had also filed copies of income tax returns of the said two persons. The Ld. CIT(A) refused to admit the same stating that the assessee had given no reason as to why the same were not filed before the AO. Thereafter the Ld.CIT(A) upheld the addition made by the AO in the absence of any evidence filed by the assessee to satisfactorily explain the source of the expenditure incurred on account of the said bills.
25. Before us the Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that the a ct of the Ld.CI T( A) i n refusin g to ad mit the a dditional e vi dences w as not a s per l aw . Th e Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that the income tax returns filed as additional evidences of the daughter and son-in-law of the assessee were in fact, part of the record of the department itself and were 17 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 not in the nature of additional evidences at all. He further stated that the contention of the assessee all along was that the bills related to purchases made by his daughter and son-in-law, which he substantiated by way of affidavits and, therefore, even affidavit was not in the nature of additional evidence but was only a clarificatory evidence. He further stated that on 16.12.2010, the assessee had filed reply to the AO stating that the documents referred to in Annexure A- 6, pages 16 to 34 were bills of saris purchased by his daughter, copy of the letter was placed before us in the Paper Book at page 10 and our ant was drawn to the same. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that the AO without giving any further opportunity passed the assessment order on 31.12.2010 and since the assessee's daughter was married and not living with him, it required time to procure the document, which opportunity was denied by the AO. He, therefore, stated that the Additional evidence needed to be admitted.
26. The Ld. DR vehemently objected to the same re lyin g on the orde r of the CI T(A) tha t the a ssessee 18 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 had not made out a valid cause for the admission of ad ditiona l e vidences as per Rule 4 6 of the Income Ta x Rules, 1962.
27. After considering the contentions of both the parties we are of the view that the assessee has made out a case that he was denied opportunity to file the evidences before the AO.As rightly pointed out by the Ld.Counsel for the assessee the Income tax returns of the daughter and son in law of the assessee were part of record of the Department itself and did not constitute additional evidence at all. The affidavits of the two persons admitting on oath that the bills mentioned in the document found belonged to them was in affirmation of the consistent contention of the assessee in this regard and it has been duly demonstrated that the non filing of the same before the AO was for the reason that adequate opportunity was not given since the two did not stay with the assessee and time for procuring the same was required which was not afforded by the AO who passed the order within 15 days of filing of reply by the assessee explaining the contents of the impugned document. 19 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10
28. We, therefore, admit the same for adjudication and restore the issue back to the AO to verify the evidences, now filed and decide the issue afresh after considering all the contentions raised by the assessee. Needless to add that due opportunity be given to the assessee of hearing.
Ground of appeal Nos.5, 6 and 7 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
29. Ground No.8 raised by the assessee reads as under:
8. That all the aforementioned additions are based on dumb documents and only under the realm of suspicion, surmises and conjectures which merit deletion at the outset.
The above ground was not pressed and the same is dismissed as not pressed.
30. Ground No.9 raised by the assessee reads as under:
9. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in upholding the charging of the interest under sections 234-A, 234-B & 234C of the Act which is not chargeable in the instant case.20 ITA No.1045/Chd/2013
A.Y. 2009-10 The above ground relating to charging of interest u/s 234A 234B and 234C of the Act is consequential and needs no adjudication.
31. Ground of appeal No.10 raised by the assessee reads as under:
10. That the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is erroneous, arbitrary, opposed to law and facts of the case and is, thus, untenable.
The above ground is general and hence needs no adjudication.
32. I n the r e s ul t, the a pp e a l of the a s se s see is par tly a ll ow e d .
O r de r p r on oun ce d i n the O pe n C our t.
Sd/- Sd/-
दवा संह अ नपणू ा& ग(ु ता
(DIVA SINGH ) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA)
याय!क सद"य/Judicial Member लेखा सद"य/Accountant Member
दनांक /Dated: 31st July, 2019
*रती*
आदे श क त*ल+प अ,े+षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent
3. आयकर आयु-त/ CIT
4. आयकर आयु-त (अपील)/ The CIT(A)
5. +वभागीय त न0ध, आयकर अपील$य आ0धकरण, च2डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
6. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदे शानस ु ार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar