Keelara Channappa Sudharshan v. Income-tax Officer, Ward 6(3)(3), Bangalore
[Citation -2019-LL-0826-44]

Citation 2019-LL-0826-44
Appellant Name Keelara Channappa Sudharshan
Respondent Name Income-tax Officer, Ward 6(3)(3), Bangalore
Court ITAT-Bangalore
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 26/08/2019
Assessment Year 2013-14
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags credit entries • bank statement • unsecured loan • scrutiny assessment • documentary evidence • genuineness of transaction • bank transaction • levy of tax • non-taxable transaction • sufficient opportunity • ex-parte order • mechanical manner • lack of application of mind • interest liability
Bot Summary: The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : 2 ITA No.1069/Bang/2018 3 ITA No.1069/Bang/2018 3. The Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed the Return of Income on 13.10.2013 disclosing total income of Rs.19,28,210. The CIT(Appeals) having considered the grounds, submissions and findings of the Assessing Officer has observed that the decision made by the Assessing Officer could not be altered as no evidence is produced in the course of appellate proceedings on the unsecured loan of Rs.6 lakhs and dealt on the disputed issue at para 5.2 of the order and confirmed the Assessing Officer s action and dismissed the assessee's appeal. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has erred in not considering the submissions on the unsecured loan, which is actually an inter-bank transfer between the Bank accounts and were not readily available with the assessee in the assessment proceedings and the ld. Since the assessee has not substantiated the evidence in the assessment proceedings. Accordingly, the order of CIT(Appeals) is set aside and restore the 5 ITA No.1069/Bang/2018 entire disputed issue to the file of Assessing Officer and allow the grounds of appeal of assessee for statistical purposes. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES C BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA. No.1069/Bang/2018 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Keelara Channappa Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sudharshan, Ward 6(3)(3), No.680, 15th Cross, 4th Block, Bangalore. HMT Layout, Vidyaranyapura, Bangalore -560 097 PAN: BQIPS4027C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri S.V. Ravi Shankar, Advocate. Revenue By: Dr. S. Palani Kumar, Addl. CIT (D.R) Date of Hearing : 23.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2019 ORDER PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM : assessee has filed appeal against order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Bangalore passed under Section 143(3) and 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : 2 ITA No.1069/Bang/2018 3 ITA No.1069/Bang/2018 3. Brief facts of case are that assessee has filed Return of Income on 13.10.2013 disclosing total income of Rs.19,28,210. Subsequently, case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and Notice under Section 143(2) & 142(1) of Act were issued. In compliance, learned Authorised Representative appeared from time to time before Assessing Officer and case was discussed. In assessment proceedings on perusal of financial statements, Assessing Officer found unsecured loan of Rs.6 lakhs and no documentary evidences are produced to support loan and therefore Assessing Officer made addition and assessed total income of Rs.25,28,210 by order under Section 143(3) of Act Dt.17.3.2016. Aggrieved by order, assessee has filed appeal with CIT(Appeals). CIT(Appeals) having considered grounds, submissions and findings of Assessing Officer has observed that decision made by Assessing Officer could not be altered as no evidence is produced in course of appellate proceedings on unsecured loan of Rs.6 lakhs and dealt on disputed issue at para 5.2 of order and confirmed Assessing Officer s action and dismissed assessee's appeal. Aggrieved by order of CIT(Appeals), assessee filed appeal with Tribunal. 4. At time of hearing, learned Authorised Representative submitted that CIT(Appeals) has erred in not considering submissions on unsecured loan, which is actually inter-bank transfer between Bank accounts and were not readily available with assessee in assessment proceedings and ld. AR 4 ITA No.1069/Bang/2018 filed statement of Bank accounts reflecting transfer entries and prayed for opportunity to substantiate claim. Contra, learned Departmental Representative supported orders of CIT(Appeals) and further submitted that these documents are filed first time before Tribunal and Assessing Officer was deprived to verify genuineness of Bank transactions. 5. We heard rival contentions and perused material on record. Prima facie, only disputed issue envisaged by learned Authorised Representative by ld. AR that transfer of Rs.6 lakhs into assessee's account is inter-bank transaction and demonstrated with statement of Bank account of assessee with Niyamithra Sahakar Bank Niyamita Bangalore-1 were on 23.6.2012, assessee has transferred amount of Rs.6 lakhs to assessee's other Bank account with Indian Overseas Bank, Bangalore. learned Authorised Representative pointed out in Both copies of Bank statements reflecting Debit and Credit entries of same amount. We found strength in submissions of learned Authorised Representative duly supported with Bank statement that credit in Books of Account are out of inter-bank transfer which cannot be disputed. But since assessee has not substantiated evidence in assessment proceedings. Accordingly, to meet ends of justice, we restore disputed issue to file of Assessing Officer for limited purpose to verify Bank account statements filed in course of hearing and examine genuineness of transaction. Accordingly, order of CIT(Appeals) is set aside and restore 5 ITA No.1069/Bang/2018 entire disputed issue to file of Assessing Officer and allow grounds of appeal of assessee for statistical purposes. 6. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 2th Aug., 2019. Sd/- Sd/- (A.K. GARODIA) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 26.08.2019. *Reddy GP Copy to 1. appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT (A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard File By order Assistant Registrar Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Bangalore Keelara Channappa Sudharshan v. Income-tax Officer, Ward 6(3)(3), Bangalore
Report Error