Harjot Singh Khurana, New Delhi vs Assessee

ITA no. 4714/Del/2011 Asstt. Yr: 2005-06 Income-tax Officer, Vs. Harjot Singh Khurana, Ward 46(4), New Delhi. C-531, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi. PAN: AFNPK 4584 R

AND C.O. No. 404/Del/2011 ( In ITA no. 4714/Del/2011) Asstt. Yr: 2005-06 Harjot Singh Khurana, Vs. Income-tax Officer, C-531, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi. Ward 46(4), New Delhi.

( Appellant ) (Respondent)

Appellant by : Shri T.Vasanthan Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri Harjot Singh Khurana

Date of hearing: 11/03/2015. Date of order : 24/03/2015.

ORDER

PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M:-

The appeal, preferred by the revenue, and the cross-objection filed by the assessee are directed against CIT(A)'s order dated 03-08-2011 relating to A.Y. 2005-06.

2. The assessee filed its return of income declaring net taxable income of Rs. 4,55,310/-. The AO received an information from ITO, CIB-1,Bangaloe vide letter dated 9-8-2009 that assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 17,72,906/- in 2 ITA 4714/D/11 & CO404/D/11

his bank account with Canara Bank during FY 2004-05. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 was issued. The AO examined the assessee's account with CITI Bank, HDFC bank and Canara Bank and noted that total amount of cash amounting to Rs. 20,17,406/- was found to be deposited in bank account. After considering the assessee's explanation, he made addition of Rs. 20,17,406/- u/s 68 of the I.T. Act and on account of gain on sale of properties at Rs. 5,08,344/-. 2.1. Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee had filed cash flow statement in which cash balance of Rs. 7,91,200/- was shown as gifts received from assessee's father and mother who were also in government service.

2.2. Ld. CIT(A) accepted the assessee's contention on this basis and further observed that the balance addition made by the AO from cash withdrawals and redeposited in the financial year was also established from the cash flow statement. 2.3. Further, as regards the addition on account of landed property sold, the assessee had filed three sale-deeds, which had been noted by ld. CIT(A) at page 5. After considering them, the addition was deleted.

2.4. Being aggrieved with the order of ld. CIT(A), the department is in appeal before us and assessee has filed cross objections.

3. Ground no. iii) taken by the department reads as under:

"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in:-

..

..

iii) in accepting additional evidence other than during the course of proceedings before the AO without giving an opportunity to the AO to examine the evidence/ documents filed by the assessee in contravention of Rule 46A."

4. In cross-objection, the assessee has primarily taken a ground that no additional evidence was filed.

3 ITA 4714/D/11 & CO404/D/11

5. We have considered the rival submissions and have perused the record of the case. We find that ld. CIT(A) has clearly taken into consideration the cash flow statement along with further details provided by assessee as well as the sale-deeds which were not produced before AO. No opportunity was provided to AO to examine these documents. We, therefore, set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of AO for deciding the issue de novo after considering the evidence to be produced before him.

6. Since, we have restored the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh, the cross objection filed by the assessee has become infructuous and stands dismissed accordingly.

7. In the result, department's appeal is partly allowed and assessee's appeal is dismissed

Order pronounced in open court on 24/03/2015.

Sd/- Sd/- (C.M. GARG) ( S.V. MEHROTRA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 24/03/2015. *MP* Copy of order to: 1. Assessee 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, New Delhi.