SHANTARAM KISAN GHULE, NAVI MUMBAI V. ITO 22(3)(4),

ITA 1056/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3342 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 14-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E B ENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / I .TA NO. 1056/MUM/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 SHRI SHANTARAM KISAN GHULE, B-27, SHOMESHWAR CHS, SECTOR 14, VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI-400 705 / VS. THE ITO - 22(3)(4), MUMBAI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. AFNPG 6425R ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI PRAKASH PANDIT / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL / DATE OF HEARING :11.08.2016 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :07.09.2016 / O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, JM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-7, MUMBAI DATED 18.11.2013 PERTAINING TO ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL: 1). IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN REJECTING ADMISSION OF ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCE AND THEREBY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITI ON MADE BY THE A O. OF RS.16,81,428/-, BEING THE CASH DEPOSITE D BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT ITA NO.1056/M/2014 2 2. REASONS GIVEN BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) FOR REJECT ING ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND THEREBY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A O. OF RS. 16,81,428/-, B EING THE CASH DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT, ARE WRONG INSUFFICIENT AND CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE ON RECORD. 3 IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION MADE BY THE A. O. OF 16,81,428/ BEING CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. REASONS GIVEN BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOR CONFIRM ING ADDITION BY THE A. O. OF RS. 16,81,428/ BEING CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK BY THE ASSESSEE, ARE WRONG INSUFFICIENT AND CO NTRARY TO THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE ON RECORD. 3. IT COULD BE SEEN FROM THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL THE PRELIMINARY OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ER RED IN REJECTING THE ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSI TS. 3.1. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF T HE CASH DEPOSITS MADE INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) BY OBSERVING THAT REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO FURNISH EVIDENCES IN SUPPO RT OF ITS CLAIM. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE T HE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITIES, THE ADDITIONAL EVID ENCES FURNISHED AT THE TIME OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS SHOULD NOT BE ADM ITTED. REFERRING TO PARA-4 OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE REASONS AS TO WHY H E COULD NOT PRODUCE THE EVIDENCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER . THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THE LD. CIT(A) REJECTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES STATING ITA NO.1056/M/2014 3 THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO ASSESSEE B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AS TO WHY HE COULD NOT FURNISH THE ADDITI ONAL EVIDENCES. THEREFORE, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 4. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO SERIO US OBJECTION IN SENDING BACK THE FILE TO THE LD. CIT(A). 5. ON A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WE F IND THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WERE NOT ADMITTED BY THE LD. C IT(A) PRIMARILY THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS GIVEN REA SONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIMS REGARDING THE SOURCES FOR DEPOSITS OF CASH I N HIS BACK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) SUBMITTED THE RE ASONS AS TO WHY HE COULD NOT FURNISH THE EVIDENCES IN TIME BEFORE T HE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THIS WAS ALSO TAKEN NOTE OF THE LD. CIT (A), BUT HE DID NOT CONSIDER THE SAME. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FURNISHING THE EVIDENCES AS RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT (A) ARE AS UNDER: SHRI S.R. NAIR, C.A. AND THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE OF THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEES SON HAS SUFFERED BURN INJURY AND ADM ITTED TO NATIONAL BURN CENTRE-AIROLI ON 15.11.2010. HE WAS IN HOSPITAL FOR 30 DAYS. HE WAS NOT IN A MENTAL FRAME OF MIND TO CONCENTRATE ON INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS AND HENCE COULD NOT GIVE PAPER IN TIME. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID PROPERTY WAS SOLD BY ASSESSEES FATHER TO MR. BHAU C. WAMAN FOR A CONSID ERATION OF RS. 9,50,000/- AND TO MR. SURESH A. GAWDE FOR A CONSIDE RATION OF RS. 7,50,000/-. THE SAID AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED BY THE A SSESSEES FATHER INTO ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT NO. SB 57408 FO R FURTHER PURCHASE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY JOINTLY WITH ASSES SEE. THE LD. ITA NO.1056/M/2014 4 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED A COPY OF ME DICAL PAPERS AND SALE AGREEMENT OF BOTH THE PROPERTIES AND IT WA S FINALLY STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED FROM SUFFICI ENT CAUSE TO PRODUCE THE REQUIRED EVIDENCE AS IT TOOK SOME TIME TO COLLECT ALL THE EVIDENCES. 6. WE FIND THE REASONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AR E JUST AND REASONABLE FOR NOT FURNISHING THE INFORMATION BEFOR E THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. T HUS, WE DIRECT THE LD. CIT(A) TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND DI SPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERITS. THUS, WE RESTORE THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHO SHALL DISPOSE OF THE ISSUES ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEAR D TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016. SD/- SD/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (C.N. PRASAD ) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ %' /JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; (' DATED 7 TH SEPTEMBER, 2016 . % . ./ RJ , SR. PS ITA NO.1056/M/2014 5 !'#$#! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ) ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. ) / CIT 5. *+ ,%%-. , -.! , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. , /01 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, *% //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI