Swapan Banerjee, Durgapur vs Assessee
- CitationI.T.A. No. 1483/KOL/ 2012
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an individual assessee who is not required to maintain books of account has disclosed the interest income from bank deposits as income in the return, and the deposits were not made during the year under assessment, the deposits cannot be treated as unexplained investment and the addition under that head is deleted.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Shri Swapan Banerjee,..................................................Appellant
C-8Y, Sagarbhanga Colony,
Durgapur-713 211
[PAN : AEIPB 6036 R]
-Vs.-
Income Tax Officer,.....................................................Respondent
Ward-1(3), Durgapur-713 216
Appearances by:
Shri Samir Das, A.R., for the assessee
Shri Rajesh Kumar, JCIT, Sr. D.R., for the Department
Date of concluding the hearing : May 06, 2015
Date of pronouncing the order : May 06, 2015
ORDER
Per P.K. Bansal:
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Durgapur in Appeal No. 202/CIT(A)/DGP/2011-12 dated 27.08.2012 for the assessment year 2009-10.
2. The only issue involved in this appeal relates to the sustenance of the addition of Rs.5,51,564/-.
3. Brief facts relating to this issue are that the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment noted that the assessee has made the repayment of the loan through Indusind Bank cheques drawn on SBI. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has maintained the following Bank accounts with SBI, MAMC Branch:-
Sl. No.
Account No.
Name of holder
Type of Account
Closing Balance
Remarks
1.
30598273881
Swapan Banerjee
Recurring Deposit
20,000/-
All investments made in FY 2008-09
2.
30581803842
-Do-
Term Deposit
2,50,000/-
-Do-
3.
30649052867
-Do-
Term Deposit
2,50,000/-
-Do-
4.
11418395674
-Do-
Savings
31,564/-
Total
5,51,564/-
The Assessing Officer treated the said amount as unexplained investment of the assessee. The assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and ld. CIT(Appeals) sustained the addition.
4. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully considered the same along with the orders of the tax authorities. We noted that the assessee has claimed before the ld. CIT(Appeals) that the interest income from the said recurring as well as term deposit has duly been shown and included as income from business in the return filed by the assessee. The assessee is an individual and not supposed to maintain books of account as desired by the Assessing Officer. It is not a case that the deposits have been made by the assessee during the year. Under these facts, we delete the addition of Rs.5,51,564/-.
5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 06th May, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/-
Mahavir Singh P.K. Bansal
(Judicial Member) (Accountant Member)
Kolkata, the 06th day of May, 2015
Copies to : (1) Shri Swapan Banerjee,
C-8Y, Sagarbhanga Colony,
Durgapur-713 211
(2) Income Tax Officer,
Ward-1(3), Durgapur-713 216
(3) Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)
(4) Commissioner of Income Tax
(5) The Departmental Representative
(6) Guard File
By order
Assistant Registrar
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Kolkata Benches, Kolkata
Laha/Sr. P.S.
I.T.A. No. 1483/KOL./2012
Assessment year: 2009-2010
Page 4 of 4
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free