Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur
Prity Singhal, Jaipur vs Acit, Jaipur on 19 April, 2017
vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR
Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k
BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 755/JP/2016
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11
Prity Singhal, cuke ACIT,
D-122, Ambabari, Vs. Circle-4,
Jaipur. Jaipur.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ANWPS 5168 C
vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)
jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT)
lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 18/04/2017
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 19/04/2017
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order dated 22/06/2016 passed by the ld CIT(A)-5, Jaipur for the A.Y. 2010- 11, wherein the assessee raised only one ground of appeal, which is as under:
"1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,83,875/- out of Rs. 4,80,000/- added by the ld. A.O. towards alleged unexplained household expenses. The action of ld. CIT(A) is 2 ITA 755/JP/2016_ Prity Singhal Vs. ACIT illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the said addition of Rs. 2,83,875/-."
2. The assessee derived income from salary, house property, capital gain and other sources. The estimated the household expenses and made addition of Rs. 4,80,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition at Rs. 2,83,875/- by holding as under:-
"2.3. I have considered the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. The assessee is a member of joint family consisting of 9 members. The total withdrawals of all members is Rs. 3,56,125, which includes the educational expenses of 3 children. The assessee has an affluent lifestyle and lives in an independent bungalow. Though the electricity expenses of the family have been stated as Rs. 5,000 per month, no supporting bills have been produced. Considering the income level of the assessee and financial status the family, monthly household withdrawals are estimated at least Rs. 5 thousand per person per month, which works out to an annual household withdrawal of Rs. 5,40,000. Further the educational expenses of Rs. 56,125 are towards school fees of assessee's children only, which has been met out of her husband's withdrawals. Education expenses of two other children in the family have not been given. The same are estimated to be Rs. 1 lakh per annum. Hence total estimated household expense is Rs. 6,40,000 (Rs. 5,40,000+ Rs. 1 lakh). This results in an unexplained household expenditure of Rs. 2,83,875 (Rs. 6,40,000-Rs. 3,56,125). The addition on this ground is accordingly restricted to Rs. 2,83,875/-."
3. The ld AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee is staying in a joint family and all the family members contributed for the common household expenditure. The family is vegetarian and simple living. The assessee was not the head of the family. There is no addition 3 ITA 755/JP/2016_ Prity Singhal Vs. ACIT made in the hands of the head of the family, who is the husband of the assessee. The ld AR also stated that there was a search operation on 28/7/2012 in the assessee's group and no addition has been made on account of household expenses in the hands of any of the family member. He also stated that no proceedings U/s 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) was initiated in respect of the assessee. He also pleaded that the addition on estimated household expenses deserves to be deleted.
4. On the other hand, the ld DR has relied on the orders of the authorities below.
5. I have heard both the sides on this issue and I have also considered the pleadings of the AR of the assessee. The assessee is staying a joint family and the household expenses are made out of the contribution made by the various family members. The assessee was not the head of the family. No addition was made in the hands of the other family members on this account. Even during the search operation as stated by the ld AR at bar that no incriminating documents relating to the household expenses were found and seized during the search operation. No proceedings U/s 153A of the Act were initiated in assessee's hands. He also stated at bar that no addition has been made 4 ITA 755/JP/2016_ Prity Singhal Vs. ACIT on account of household expenses in the hands of any of the family member. Considering all the facts and circumstances, in my considered view, the addition of Rs. 1.00 lac shall be sufficient to cover the unexplained household expenses, therefore, I sustain the addition to that extent only.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19/04/2017.
Sd/-
¼Hkkxpan½ (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 19th April, 2017 *Ranjan vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Smt. Prity Singhal, Jaipur.
2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ACIT, Circle-4, Jaipur.
3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT
4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A)
5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur
6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 755/JP/2016) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar