Ghulam Mohd. Dastagir Khan, Nizamabad, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-1, Nizamabad, Nizamabad

ITA 1113/HYD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2527 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMISHA S GUPT
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES B SMC BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT ITA. NO.1113/HYD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006 - 2007 GHULAM MOHD. DASTAGIR KHAN, 9 - 4 - 312, BARKATPURA, QUILLA ROAD, NIZAMABAD. PAN: AUZPK 5648 R VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIZAMABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE: NONE FOR REVENUE : SMT. AMISHA S. GUPT, DR DATE OF HEARING : 2 2 .02.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 2 .02.2018 ORDER PER D. MANMOHAN , VP. THIS APPEAL IS FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSEE AND IT PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07. 2. MR. GHULAM MOHD. DASTAGIR KHAN IS SHOWN AS ASSESSEE HEREIN AND IN CAUSE TITLE THE SAME NAME WAS MENTIONED AS APPELLANT WHEREAS, IN THE VERIFICATION COLUM N SH RI GHULAM MOHD. AMEERKHAN SIGNED IN HIS CAPACITY AS L EGAL H EIR OF GHULAM MOHD. DASTAGIR KHAN , WHICH INDICATES THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NO MORE. IF THAT BE THE CASE, THE APPEAL IN THE NAME OF A DEAD PERSON IS DEFECTIVE. EVEN OTHERWISE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THOUGH THE APPEAL WAS POSTED FROM TIME TO TIME TO RECTIFY THE DEFECTS AND IN FACT SHRI TEJPRAKASH TOSHNIWAL APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SOUGHT TIME BUT, TODAY NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE. 2 3. IT MAY BE NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE DECLARED TOTAL INCOME OF RS.99,297/ - WHEREAS THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 6,71,800/ - BY ADDING A SUM OF RS. 5,72,500/ - TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT WITH M/S. SADAT ENCLAVE. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT HE HAS SOLD STOCK OF OLD MOTOR PARTS , WHICH WAS THE BUSINESS CARRIED ON SOMEWHERE IN THE YEAR 2002 - 2003 , AND THE SAME WAS INVESTED. HOWEVER, THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT VERIFICATION OF RECORDS SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED ANY INFORMATION WITH REGARD TO OLD MOTOR PARTS SCRAP BUSINESS AND THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT WITH M/S. SADAT ENCLAVE. FOR THE SAME REASONS , LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE A.O. AND EVEN AT THE SECOND APPELLATE STAGE , THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE TO CONTRADICT THE FINDINGS OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. ACCOR DINGLY, AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. S D / - (D. MANMOHAN) VICE PRESIDENT HYDERABAD, DATED: 22 ST FEBRUARY, 2018. OKK, SR.PS COPY TO 1. TEJPRAKASH TOSHNIWAL, ADVOCATE, 4 - 1 - 6/B/4 , RAMKOTE, HYDERABAD - 500 095. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIZAMABAD. 3. CIT (A) - 5, HYDERABAD. 4. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 5, HYDERABAD. 5. DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE