Harpreet Singh Bagga, Burnpur vs Assessee

I .T.A . N o. 15 90 / KOL ./ 20 1 4 As ses sm e nt y e ar : 20 04 - 20 0 5

Page 1 of 3

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA 'SM C' BENCH, KOLKATA

Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial M ember

I.T .A. No . 159 0 /KOL/ 2 01 4 Assess ment year : 2004 -2 00 5 Ha rp re et Singh Ba gga ,...................... ............... ....................Ap p ella nt Ja na ta Roa d, Na rsin gba ndh , P.O. Bu rnp u r-713 325 [PA N : A HIPB 4707 C]

-Vs.- Income Ta x Office r,........ .............................. ........ .................Resp ond ent Wa rd -1(2), A sa nsol

Appeara nces by : N o n e, f or the as sessee Shri K.L. Kanak, JCIT, Sr. D.R., for th e Department

Dat e of concluding t he hearin g : Feb ruary 24, 2015 Dat e of pr onouncing th e order : Feb ruary 24, 2015

Per Ge orge M athan:

This is an app eal filed by the assess ee a gain st th e order of ld. Commissioner of Inco me T ax (App eal s), As an so l in Appeal No. 152/CIT(A) /A SL /W-1(2)/A SL /06 -07 dated 26.05.2014 for the ass ess men t year 2 004-05.

2. None rep res ent ed on beh alf of th e a sse ss ee and Sh ri K.L. Kanak, JCIT, Sr. D.R. rep re sen ted on behal f of the Revenu e.

3. At the ti me of h earin g, it was su bmit ted by th e ld. Sr. D.R. that Gro und No . (a) of th e assessee's appea l was a gain st the actio n o f the ld. CIT(App eals) in co n firmin g th e addition m ade by the As se ssin g Offic er of a sum of R s.1,7 7,000/- rep resent ing t he peak credit of the deposit ed amount in the Bank Accou nt No. 3 0965 with Bank of India, Burnpur. It was th e submi s sion before the Assess i ng Office r that the ass es see wa s unable to explain the depo sits in the Bank acco unt. It was th e submis sion that the ass ess ee cl ai med to be doing g rocery business. However, no I .T.A . N o. 15 90 / KOL ./ 20 1 4 As ses sm e nt y e ar : 20 04 - 20 0 5

Page 2 of 3

ev id ence o f the s ame had been p ro duced before the As ses sin g Officer. It was th e submi ssion th at the ass es see had produced an affid av it of the as se sse e's grand moth er saying th at th e Bank account was a jo in t Bank accoun t with the as se ss ee and the g ran d mother and deposit s in the Bank accoun t belo nged to th e grandmother. It wa s th e sub mi ssion th at th e ld. CIT(App eals) did not acc ept the eviden ce. It was th e submissio n tha t the order of th e ld. CIT(Appeals ) was liable to be upheld.

4. It was the fu rther sub mission by the ld. S r. D.R. that Gro und No. (b) was ag ainst the action of th e ld. CIT(A ppeals) in confi rmin g th e addition of Rs.10 ,000/- rep re sentin g low d rawin gs m ade by the As ses sin g Offi ce r. It was th e submi ssion by the ld. Sr. D.R. that the as sessee i s an individual and the As ses sin g Offic er had esti mated the h ousehold expenditure at Rs. 55,000/- and the assessee h as showin g only Rs.45,000/-. The difference of Rs.10, 000/- was added. Ld. Sr. D.R. vehemently suppo rted the ord er of the As ses sin g Offi ce r and ld . CIT(Appe als).

5. I hav e con side red the submi ssions. A perusal of the assess men t order clearly shows that th e assessee had explained th e sou rce s of the transaction s in the Bank accoun t. Be fore the ld. CIT(App eal s) th e assessee had produced an affid avit of the assess ee's grand mo the r who was also the joint-holder of the said B ank ac count, wherein the ass essee 's grand moth er ha s catego rically admitted th at the Bank account belo ngs to her and that sh e h as offered interest income in her h and s. Once it is noticed that the assessee's grand mo ther Smt. Krishna D ev i Singh h as catego rically admitt ed th e o wne rship of the Ba nk acco unt and h as al so accep ted th at sh e ha s fully repo rted the interest in co me f rom the Bank accoun t then such B ank accou nt cannot be t reated to be th e und isclo sed or unexpl ained inve st men t in the h ands of the assessee. Furthe r a perusal of the o rde r of the ld. CIT(Appeals ) shows that the ld. CIT(Appeals) h as catego rically accept ed that the B ank account i s jointly held by the as se sse e and his grandmothe r. In the se circu mst anc es, I am of th e v ie w I .T.A . N o. 15 90 / KOL ./ 20 1 4 As ses sm e nt y e ar : 20 04 - 20 0 5

Page 3 of 3

that the additio n of the p eak c redit in resp ect of th e s aid Bank account cannot be mad e in th e hand s of th e as ses se e and consequently the Assessing Officer i s di rect ed to del ete the same.

6. Comin g to the i ssu e of lo w d rawin g s, a peru sal of th e assess men t order clearly sh ows that the A sses sin g Officer has cat egoric ally admitt ed that the asses see does not h ave any b usines s and n o other so urc e of inco me. Fu rther Insp ecto r's repo rt shows that the ass ess ee is a Bachelo r and is liv ing with his pa ren ts. The Assessin g Offi cer has no t been able to show th at as to how he has a rrived at t he a mount of R s.55, 000/- as bein g the required d rawings. In these ci rcu mstan ces, no eviden ce hav in g been found again st th e asses see, no addition on account of lo w d ra win gs can be mad e in the hand s of the ass essee. Consequently the additio n made by the Assessing Officer and confi rmed by th e l d. CIT(Ap peals) stands d elet ed.

7. In the result, the appeal filed by the ass eessee is allo wed.

Orde r p ronounced in th e open Co urt on 24 t h Feb rua ry, 2015.

Sd /-

George Mathan (Judicial M embe r) Kolkata, th e 24 t h day of Feb ruary , 2015 Co pies to : (1) Ha rp re et Singh Ba gga , Ja na ta Roa d, Na rsin gba ndh , P.O. Bu rnp u r-713 325

(2) Income Ta x Office r, Wa rd -1(2), A sa nsol

(3) Comm iss ioner of Income-tax (Appeal s) (4) Com mis sioner of Incom e Tax (5) The Depar tmental R epr es entative (6) Guard Fil e By order

Assistant Registrar Income Tax App ellate Tribunal Kolkata Ben ch es, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S.