Case Number: ITA 1156/DEL/2020
Appellant: Vijay Gupta, Faridabad
Respondent: ITO Ward-2(5), Faridabad
Assessment Year: 2017-18
Result: Appeal allowed, addition of Rs. 6,00,000 overturned
Case Filed On: 2020-06-02
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2022-10-13
Pronounced On: 2022-10-13
The case involves Vijay Gupta (the appellant), appealing against the order passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) Ward-2(5), Faridabad, for the assessment year 2017-18. The appellant challenged the addition of Rs. 6,00,000 made by the ITO, which was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal and overturning the addition.
The appellant, Vijay Gupta, filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A), Faridabad, dated 20.03.2020. The CIT(A) had confirmed the addition of Rs. 6,00,000 made by the ITO, which was credited to the appellant’s bank account on 15.06.2016. The appellant explained that the amount was drawn from his capital account, but the CIT(A) found no such withdrawal on the specified date, leading to the confirmation of the addition.
The appellant pleaded that the CIT(A) had erred in not fully considering the written submissions and confirmed the addition without proper evaluation. The appellant further submitted that due to the lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the necessary documentary evidence from HDFC Bank was collected and sent to the CIT(A) via mail during the lockdown period, but it was not considered in the order.
The CIT(A) had stated in the order:
“Further, a credit of Rs. 6,00,000 in the bank account of the assessee on 15.06.2016, it has been explained by the assessee from drawings made from his capital account. However, on the perusal of the capital account of the assessee, it is noted that there is a drawing of Rs. 6,00,000 on 10.10.2016. There are no withdrawals of Rs. 6,00,000 on 15.06.2016. In the circumstances, the deposit of Rs. 6,00,000 in the bank account of the assessee has not been found explained. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO of Rs. 6,00,000 is hereby confirmed.”
The appellant contended that the necessary documentary evidence was collected and sent through mail but was not received by the CIT(A) due to the lockdown.
The ITAT examined the bank statement of Axis Bank, which clearly showed a credit entry of Rs. 6,00,000 on 15.06.2016. Additionally, the disbursement details of the housing loan account with HDFC Bank confirmed the source of the Rs. 6,00,000 credited to the appellant’s account. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) had summarily confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer without considering the documentary evidence provided by the appellant.
The ITAT concluded that the appellant had provided sufficient evidence to explain the source of the Rs. 6,00,000 credited to his bank account on 15.06.2016. The ITAT allowed the appeal and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs. 6,00,000.
Implications: This case highlights the importance of proper evaluation of documentary evidence in tax assessment proceedings. The decision underscores that appellants should be given fair consideration and that evidence should not be disregarded due to procedural issues, especially during extraordinary circumstances like a lockdown.
Vijay Gupta vs. ITO Ward-2(5), Faridabad – ITA 1156/DEL/2020: Assessment Year 2017-18
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform