KASHINATH TAPURIAH, KOLKATTA V. ACIT CEN CIR 2, MUMBAI

ITA 1596/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0998 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 23-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 08-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N HEMALATHADR
• Assessee Lawyers: HARESH P KENIA
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

, - , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC, MUMBAI , ! ' , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, ITA NO.1596/MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1996-97 KASHINATH TAPURIAH, 9, ROWDON STREET, FLAT NO.20, 5 TH FLOOR UDYANCHAL BUILDING, KOLKATA-700017 / VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 MUMBAI / ASSESSEE / REVENUE P.A. NO. ABUPT5665K $ % & / ASSESSEE BY SHRI HARESH P. KENIA $ % & / REVENUE BY MS. N. HEMALATHA-DR / DATE OF HEARING 03/01/2018 & / DATE OF ORDER: 03/01/2018 & / O R D E R THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 30/11/2016 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI, CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.69,680/- ON ACCOUNT O F ITA NO.1596/MUM/2017 KASHINATH TAPURIAH 2 UNDISCLOSED INCOME U/S 69A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1 961 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT). 2. DURING HEARING, SHRI HARISH P. KENIA, LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ADVANCED ARGUMENTS, WHICH IS IDEN TICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED BY CONTENDING THAT THE ASSESSEE I S AN OLD AGE PERSON DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS.2000 US $ IN THE F OREIGN BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE ON 22/11/1995 AND DUE TO PHYSICAL AND MENTAL DISABILITY COULD NOT EXPLAIN TH E SOURCE OF THE DEPOSIT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR, MS. N. HEMALATHA, STRONGLY CONTENDED THAT THE SOURCE OF TH E DEPOSIT COULD NOT BE EXPLAINED, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION WAS RIGHTLY MADE. 2.1. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACTS , IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED 2000 US $ IN UBS AG , ZURICH BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SO URCE OF SUCH DEPOSIT AND THUS THE ADDITION WAS MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), THE ASSESSEE T OOK THE STAND THAT HE WAS SUFFERING FROM MULTIPLE DIESES AN D THUS ITA NO.1596/MUM/2017 KASHINATH TAPURIAH 3 THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO RECOLLECT THE SOURCE OF SUCH DEPOSIT. IDENTICAL PLEA WAS ALSO RAISED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF FACTS, ADMITTEDLY, THE ONUS U/S 68/69A OF THE ACT IS UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN T HE NATURE AND SOURCE OF SUCH DEPOSIT. IT IS NOTED THAT RIGHT FROM ASSESSMENT STAGE AND TILL THE STAGE OF THIS TRIBUNA L, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED THE SOURCE AND THE GENUI NENESS OF THE DEPOSIT. THUS, WITHOUT GOING INTO MUCH DELI BERATION, I FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE CONCLUSION OF THE LD. COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL), RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVE FROM BOTH SIDES AT T HE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 03/01/2018. SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) ! ' / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 03/01/2018 F{X~{T? P.S / ! ITA NO.1596/MUM/2017 KASHINATH TAPURIAH 4 & $ )!*+ ,&+-* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '#$%& / THE APPELLANT 2. '(%& / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ) ) * / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. ) ) * / CIT- , MUMBAI 5. +,- ' , ) '#$ ' / , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. -0 1$ / GUARD FILE. & / BY ORDER, (+# ' //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI