BHARAT SAWALCHAND JAIN, MUMBAI V. ITO - 19(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 138/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3243 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SMITA VERMA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Assessment record
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) I.T.A. NO. 138/MUM/2021 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) BHARAT SAWALCHAND JAIN C/O. D.C. BOTHRA & CO. LLP(CA) (FORMERLY KNOWN AS D.C. BOTHRA & CO.) 297, TARDEO ROAD, WILLE MANSIO N 1 ST FLOOR, OPP. BANK OF INDIA NANA CHOWK, MUMBAI-400 004. PAN : ADCPJ8401D VS. ITO-19(1)(2) 2 ND FLOOR MATRU MANDIR TARDEO MUMBAI-07. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY MS. SMITA VERMA DATE OF HEARING 11 . 1 0 .2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11.10.2021 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST OR DER OF LEARNED CIT-A DATED 8.8.2019 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-1 3. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER :- 1. THAT ON FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN LAW NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 DT. 12/09/2016 TO INITIATE THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDING AND CONSEQUENT ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE I.T. ACT ON 26/12/ 2017 IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THAT ON FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN LAW BOTH THE ID. A .O. & AND ALSO ID. C.I.T.(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DENYING THE EXEMPTION C LAIM MADE U/S 10(38) AND IN MAKING AND UPHOLDING THE ADDITION U/S 68 AT RS . 7,81,950/- TREATING THE GROSS SALE PROCEEDS OF LISTED LONG-TERM EQUITY S HARES SUBJECTED TO COLLECTION OF STT, SOLD ON RECOGNIZED STOCK EXCHANGE AT THE PREVAILING QUOTED RATE AFTER HOLDING FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR AS UNEXPLA INED CASH CREDIT DISREGARDING THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES FUR NISHED, MERELY ON THE BASIS OF UNTESTED REPORT OF D.I. KOLKATA BUT WITHOUT BRIN GING ANY ADVERSE EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL ON ASSESSMENT RECORD. 3. THAT THE ALLEGED DENIAL OF EXEMPTION CLAIM MADE U/S 10(38) AND ALLEGED ADDITION MADE U/S 68 AT RS. 7,81,950/- IS WRONG ON FA CTS AND BAD IN LAW SINCE THE COPY OF INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTS RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION BHARAT SAWALCHAND JAIN 2 DIRECTORATE, KOLKATA HAVE BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE ID. A.O. WITHOUT VERIFICATION AND ADJUDICATION THEREOF AND ASSESSEE AP PELLANT HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED WITH SUCH MATERIAL THUS DENYING THE OPPORTUN ITY OF CROSS EXAMINATION AND OR REBUTTAL OF THE SAME IN GROSS VIOLA TION OF PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 4. THAT THE APPEAL GROUND NO.L RAISED IS INDEPENDENT G ROUNDS AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO APPEAL GROUND NO. 2 TO APPEAL GROUND NO. 3. 3. AT THE OUTSET IN THIS CASE IT IS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL HAS SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION THAT THE ASSESSEE WISHES T O WITHDRAW THE APPEAL, PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION OF DISPUTE IN THE VSV SCHEME LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THIS P ROPOSITION. 4. UP ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION I GRANT PERMISSION T O WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.10.2021. SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R MUMBAI; DATED : 11/10/2021 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) PS ITAT, MUMBAI