Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune
Devendra Swaroopchand Shingavi,, Pune vs Assessee on 6 January, 2016
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, पुणे यायपीठ "बी" पुणे म
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCH "B", PUNE
ी आर. के. पांडा, लेखा सद य
एवं ी !वकास अव थी, या#यक सद य के सम$
BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, AM
AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.618/PN/2014
#नधा&रण वष& / Assessment Year : 2009-10
Shri Devendra Swaroopchand ..........
Shingavi, अपीलाथ /
161/162, Dwarika Apartments, Appellant
Mukundnagar, Pune - 411 040
PAN No.AULPS9948J
बनाम v/s
ITO, Ward-11(1), Pune ..........
यथ /
Respondent
अपीलाथ क ओर से / Assessee by : None
यथ क ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Hitendra Ninawe
सन
ु वाई क तार ख / घोषणा क तार ख /
Date of Hearing :05.01.2016 Date of Pronouncement:06.01.2016
आदे श / ORDER
PER R.K. PANDA, AM :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31-10-2013 of the CIT(A)-I, Pune relating to Assessment Year 2009-10.
2. This appeal was fixed for hearing on 12-08-2015. At the request of the assessee the case was adjourned to 06-10-2015. On 06-10-2015 none appeared on behalf of the assessee for which fresh notice was issued through RPAD fixing the date of 2 ITA No.618/PN/2014 hearing on 15-01-2016. Although the notice was duly served on the assessee (acknowledgement placed on record) none appeared on behalf of the assessee when the name of the assessee was called. No application seeking adjournment of the case has been filed. Therefore, this appeal is being decided on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative.
3. The assessee in the grounds of appeal has challenged the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.25 lakhs made by the AO on account of unexplained capital introduced u/s.68 and another Rs.21,10,020/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits made in the bank account.
4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and derives commission income from grocery items. He filed his return of income on 19-02-2010 declaring total income of Rs.3,52,980/-. Despite service of notice u/s.143(2) and 142(1) there was no compliance from the assessee's side. The AO completed the assessment/s.144 of the I.T. Act.
5. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO noted that assessee has introduced capital of Rs.25 lakhs in his capital account which has been utilized for purchase of office No.306, 206, and 125 as appearing in the asset aside of the balance sheet. Since there was no compliance from the assessee's side to explain the source of Rs.25 lakhs the AO, in the order passed u/s.144, made addition of Rs.25 lakhs u/s.68 of the I.T. Act. Similarly, the AO noted from the AIR 3 ITA No.618/PN/2014 information that the assessee has made cash deposit of Rs.30,80,000/- during the year in his savings bank account maintained with HDFC bank, Oswal Bandhu Samaj Building, Pune. Since there was no compliance from the side of the assessee to explain the source of the cash deposits in the bank account the AO, after considering the total deposit of Rs.35,43,000/- and the commission received of Rs.9,32,980/-, made addition of Rs.26,10,020/- being the difference as unexplained cash credits u/s.68 of the I.T. Act.
6. In appeal the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions of Rs.25,00,000/- and gave part relief on the other addition. So far as capital introduction of Rs.25 lakhs is concerned, the Ld.CIT(A) gave a finding that assessee was not in a position to explain the source of the capital so introduced either during the assessment proceedings or in appeal proceedings. He has also given a finding that the assessee has not contested the addition made on this ground in the present proceeding. It was the grievance of the assessee that the same capital was deposited in HDFC bank account and therefore the AO is not justified in bringing the cash deposits in the bank account to tax separately. Since the assessee could not explain the source of Rs.25,00,000/- during the appeal proceedings the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO.
7. So far as deposit in bank account is concerned the CIT(A) noted that one single cash deposit of Rs.20 lakhs was made in the bank account on 17-02-2009 after utilization of entire capital introduced during the year for acquisition of 3 office 4 ITA No.618/PN/2014 units. After granting telescoping effect of Rs.5 lakhs the CIT(A) sustained addition of Rs.21,10,020/-.
8. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us.
9. We have heard the arguments advanced by the Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, there was no compliance before the AO for which the AO passed the order u/s.144 and made addition of Rs.25 lakhs u/s.68 being unexplained capital introduced in the capital account and another Rs.26,10,020/- being the cash deposits made in the bank account, the source of which could not be explained. We find before the CIT(A) the assessee could not explain the introduction of capital of Rs.25 lakhs for which the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs.25 lakhs. So far as addition of Rs.26,10,020/- is concerned the Ld.CIT(A) after considering the cash deposit of Rs.25 lakhs made on 17-02-2009 gave telescoping effect of Rs.5 lakhs from the total cash deposit of Rs.26,10,020 and sustained addition of Rs.21,10,020/-. He had given valid reasons while sustaining the addition of Rs.25 lakhs on account of capital introduction. Similarly, he has also given valid reasons while sustaining addition of Rs.21,10,020/- out of addition of Rs. 26,10,020/-. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any infirmity in the reasoned order of the CIT(A). Accordingly, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) on both the additions. Grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly dismissed.
5ITA No.618/PN/2014
10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 06-01-2016.
Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे Pune; दनांक Dated : 06th January, 2016. सतीश आदे श क) *#त,ल!प अ-े!षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent
3. The CIT(A)-I, Pune
4. The CIT-I, Pune
5.
$वभागीय 'त'न(ध, आयकर अपील य अ(धकरण, "बी" पण ु े/ DR, ITAT, "B" Pune;
6. गाड- फाईल / Guard file.
आदे शानस ु ार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // // True Copy // //स या$पत 'त //True C // व/र0ठ 'नजी स(चव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपील य अ(धकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune