Jagdish Prasad Khaitan, Kolkata V. I.T.O.,Ward-35(2), Kolkata

ITA 1221/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5162 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 29-01-2020
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS RANU BISWAS CITSRDR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 147; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH SMC KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S, GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1221/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11 JAGDISH PRASAD KHAITAN 30, BENTINCK STREET, ROOM NO.309 DALHOUSIE SQUARE, KOLKATA-700 001 [ PAN NO.AFUPK 1588 E ] / V/S . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD35(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, POORVA, 110, SHANTI PALLY, KOLKATA- 700 107 /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT NONE /BY RESPONDENT MRS. RANU BISWAS, ADDL. CIT-SR-DR /DATE OF HEARING 29-01-2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19-02-2020 /O R D E R THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 , ARISES AGAINST THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-10, KOLKATAS ORDER DATED 29.03.2019 PASSED IN CASE NO.1024/CIT(A)-10/WD-35(2)/2010-11/2017-18/ KOL, INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. CASE CALLED TWICE. REGISTRY HAD SENT AN RPAD TO THE ASSESSEE STAND RECEIVED BACK UN-SERVED. IT IS ACCORDINGLY PROCEEDED EX PA RTE. THE CASE IS NOW TAKEN UP FOR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS. 2. THE ASSESSEES TWIN SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS CHALLENG ING CORRECTNESS OF BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION DISALLOWING / ADDING HIS COMMODITY PROFITS OF 7,18,688/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS U/S 68 OF THE ACT FOLLOWED BY BROKERAGE EXPENSES OF 937/- THEREUPON. I NOTICE WITH THE ABLE ASSISTANCE OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ITA NO.1221/KOL/2019 A.Y. 2010-11 JAGDISH PRASAD KHAITAN. VS. ITO WD-35(2), KOL. PAGE 2 THAT NOT ONLY BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE GONE BY THE ENTIRE FACTS ON RECORD BUT ALSO THEY HAVE CONSIDERED VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS IN CLUDING SUMATI DAYAL VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (1995) 80 TAXMANN. 89/214 ITR 801 (SC) AND COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS.DURGA PRASAD MORE (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) TO CONCLUDE THAT THE ASSESSEES ALLEGED COMMODITY TRAN SACTIONS SUFFER FROM LACK OF GENUINENESS / CREDITWORTHINESS. THE VERY FACTUAL PO SITION CONTINUES BEFORE ME AS WELL. I THEREFORE AFFIRM THE IMPUGNED ADDITION UNDER CHAL LENGE. 3. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 19/02/2020 SD/- (S.S. GODARA) JUD ICIAL MEMBER KOLKATA, *DKP/SR.PS - 19/02/2020 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-JAGDISH PRASAD KHAITAN, 30 BENTINCK STRE ET, ROOM.NO.309 DALHOUSIE SQUA RE, KOLKATA-700001 2. /RESPONDENT-ITO WD-35(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, POORVA, 1 10, SHANTI PALLY KOLKATA-107 3. ' % / CONCERNED CIT 4. % - / CIT (A) 5. & ))' , ' / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. + / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , /TRUE COPY/ ',