9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 981X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny hesitation to delete the addition - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 251/JPR/2022 - - - Dated:- 20-3-2023 - Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, JM And Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, AM For the Assessee : Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.) For the Revenue : Ms Monisha Chaudhary (JCIT) ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as NFAC/CIT(A) ], dated 25.04.2022 for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs.7,48,900/- (being part of expenses incurred on marriage of daughter of assessee) made by ld.AO u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act, arbitrarily by alleging the same as unexplained. 1.1 That, Id.CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the addition of Rs.7,48,900/- by grossly ignoring the submission of assessee that some cash was available with assessee out of savings even prior to the date of engagement (credit of which was not given by Id.AO). 1.2 That, Id.CIT(A) has further erred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he same as unexplained expenditure. The penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c)of the Act also initiated for concealed the particular of income/furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. With the above remarks, total income of the assessee is computed as under:- Total income shown by the assessee in ITR Rs. 12,83,340/- Addl:- Unexplained expenditure u/s 69C Rs. 7,48,900/- Total taxable income Rs. 20,32,240/- 5. In first appeal the ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the disallowance made by AO by observing as under:- 5.1.1 I have considered the submission of the assesse and given a careful thought. The solitary issue involved in impugned case is regarding expenses related to assessee's daughter, which remained unexplained to the tune of Rs.7,48,900/- and added back to total income in terms of section 69C of IT Act, Although, the assessee vide his submission has denied to have incurred expenses more than the amount withdrawn from his bank account No.51052254274 maintained with SBBJ Tilak Marg. Jaipur, Account No.51089008633 with SBI, Secretariate, Jaipur and A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. In response to notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred as The Act ) assessee filed the return of income on 03.01.2017 declaring total income at Rs. 12,83,340/-(APB 1-4). During the course of assessment proceedings based on the evidences produced and case laws relied upon ld. AO accepted the contention of assessee that actual expense incurred on daughter s marriage was of Rs. 27,82,500/- only and not of Rs. 81,50,000/- which is also evident from the page 18 of the Assessment order and also accepted ld. CIT(A). Regarding the source of Rs. 27,82,500/- it was explained that a sum of Rs. 6,82,500/- were contributed by assessee sclose relatives including his father, uncle, father in law and wife and balance amount of Rs. 21.00 lcas was out of bank withdrawals of Rs. 22,84,900/- made by assessee on various dates from his bank accounts before and after the wedding. However, ld.AO has accepted the source to the extent of Rs. 20,33,600/- as explained which include Rs. 6,82,500/- incurred by relatives and Rs. 13,51,100/- withdrawn from bank upto the date of marriage as utilised towards the marriage expenses and balance expenses of Rs. 7,48,900/- was treated as une ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ld. AO as well as ld. CIT(A) and balance expenditure of Rs. 21,00,000/- were incurred by assessee out of his own sources, out of which some expenditures were incurred on credit basis and payments were made after marriage as per the availability of funds with the assessee. It is general practice in occasion like marriage functions wherein payments are made in instalments much after the date of marriage. It is further submitted during the course of assessment assessee has submitted the details of head wise expenses incurred which is also reproduced at pages 6 7 of the assessment order. From the perusal of the nature of expenses like food items, making charges, catering and other miscellaneous expenses it is submitted that exact amount of expenditure could be ascertained only when the marriage is solemnized and thus the full and final settlement could be possible only after the event and therefore, it is wrong to say that the withdrawals made after the marriage were not utilized towards for clearing the marriage dues. As submitted above, assessee in support of his claim also furnished the detailed cash book as well as Bank statements before the ld. AO as well as before the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d his daughter s affidavit. Thus, as assessee has himself has stated in his statement that maximum expenses of Rs. 27,82,500/- have been incurred in his daughter s marriage and the assessee has taken a plea that the incurred only Rs. 21,00,000/- on his daughter s marriage. 8. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the order of the lower authorities and submitted that the expenses given by the ld. AR for the assessee during the assessment proceedings are not genuine and further, the ld. DR pointed that in FIR No. 162/2015 and case No. 42/2017 was lodged gainst Shri Anil Meena Others, on the basis of which investigation against Shri Raj Kumar Meena was started. The FIR was lodged based on personal assumption of expenses, made during the marriage and engagement. 9. We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record. All grounds are interconnected pertaining to cash deposit on observing the facts of the case, we noted that the assessee is Grade-A Officer with Rajasthan State Government and during the year under consideration, assessee was having Income from Salary. We note that the case was reopened by the ld. AO, the main issue on the case was reopened by the ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39900 6. 01.04.14 SBI, Secretariat, Jaipur 51089008633 1200 7. 02.04.14 30000 8. 03.04.14 30000 9. 07.04.14 30000 10. 14.04.14 40000 11. 05.04.14 200000 12. 31.03.14 Kotak Mahindra Bank, Jaipur 7611403527 200000 13. 16.04.14 300000 14. 29.04.14 300000 Total 1351100 The ld. AO during the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble with the assessee out of which a sum of Rs. 21,00,000/- were utilized for meeting out the marriage expenses. We noted that neither the ld. AO nor ld. CIT(A) has doubted the availability of funds in the bank accounts nor doubted the withdrawals made therefrom however, without stating any single reason as why the withdrawals made after the marriage cannot consider as utilised for making payment of due expenses. Thus, the addition so made purely in arbitrary manner without considering the cash withdrawal made between the period from 18.03.2014 to 07.05.2014 for which source is explained. Moreover we have persuaded the cash book of Mr. Raj Kumar Meena for the period 01.03.2014 to 31.08.2014 it is evident where the cash withdrawals made by the assessee is explained as well total withdrawal of Rs. 22,84,900/- and the cash in hand on 01.03.2014 and which is Rs. 2,82,896/- where the total cash available was Rs. 25,67,796/- which is evident that the assessee has cash Rs. 25,67,796/- which was withdrawn on various dates from his bank account mentioned in the capacity of individual as well as jointly with his wife and after incorporating the opening cash available with assessee out of whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
