PRAMOD RATILAL SHAH, MUMBAI V. ITO 24(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 1186/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0772 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 15-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SATYANARAYAN RAJU
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

, SMC , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1186/MUM/2017 : ASST.YEAR 2010-2011 SHRI PRAMOD RATILAL SHAH G-1 BUILDING 45, GARODIA NAGAR GHATKOPAR (EAST) MUMBAI 400 077. PAN : AACPS0090A. / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 24(3)(3) MUMBAI. ( / APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT) /APPELLANT BY : SHRI PANKAJ MALL /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.SATYANARAYAN RAJU / DATE OF HEARING : 15.05.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15.05.2017 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 04.11.2016 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DID NOT CONSIDER THE CASH BOOK AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER APPEALS VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY NOT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO YOUR APPELLANT. 3. YOUR APPELLANT REQUEST LEAVE TO ALLOW HER TO ALTER, AMEND, MODIFY OR TO ADD TO GROUNDS OF APPEAL STATED HEREINABOVE AND TO TREAT THE ABOVE GROUNDS AS INDEPENDENT FROM EACH OTHER. ITA NO.1186/MUM/2017. PRAMOD RATILAL SHAH 2 3. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON PERUSAL OF THE INFORMATION IN ITS DETAILS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED CASH OF RS.10,45,000 IN HIS SAVING BANK ACCOUNT WITH ICICI BANK. THE AO HAS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT, BUT NO REPLY HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE A.O. TREATED THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED THE SAME TO HIS TOTAL INCOME. 3. BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SENIOR CITIZEN, WHO HAS UNDERGONE BYPASS SURGERY AND THEREFORE HE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARING BEFORE THE A.O. THE ASSESSEE ALSO WANTED TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF CASH BOOK TO EXPLAIN THE DEPOSITS. HOWEVER, THE LEARNED CIT(A) DID NOT PERMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND PROCEEDED TO CONFIRM THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AGAINST THIS ORDER THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. 4. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE GRIEVANCES OF BOTH SIDES. IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE NEEDS TO BE ADMITTED. THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION THAT HE IS A SENIOR CITIZEN AND HAS UNDERGONE BYPASS SURGERY, WHICH PREVENTED HIM FROM APPEARING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CANNOT BE BRUSHED ASIDE. ACCORDINGLY, I REMIT THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL CONSIDER THE ISSUE AFRESH KEEPING IN MIND THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEING SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE, AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. ITA NO.1186/MUM/2017. PRAMOD RATILAL SHAH 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 15 TH DAY OF MAY, 2017. SD/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 15 TH MAY, 2017. DEVDAS* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. / CIT(A)-39, MUMBAI 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. [ / GUARD FILE.