RAM BABURAO SALVE, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 17(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1647/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0464 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 29-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B PRUSETH
• Keywords: Business income; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/ SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & SANDEEP GOSAIN (JM) I.T.A. NO. 1647 /MUM/20 16 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 11 - 12 ) SHRI RAM BABURAO SALVE 17/18, VYAPAR BHUVAN P DMELLO ROAD CARNAC BUDER MUMBAI - 400 009. VS. ITO WARD - 17(3)(1) AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMAI - 400 020. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) PAN NO . AACPS5498L ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY SHRI B. PRUSETH DATE OF HEARING 29 .5 . 201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29 . 5 . 201 7 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM) : - THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE REVISION ORDER DATED 10.2.2016 PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIT - 17, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 2011 - 12. THE ASSESSEE IS CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF REVISION ORDER PASSED BY LE ARNED PRINCIPAL LEARNED CIT(A). 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT BY REGISTERED POST ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION. HENCE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EX - PARTE, WITHOUT PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HEARD LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE IS A TRANSPORT CONTRACTOR AND CONTAINER HANDLING TRANSPORT CONTRACTOR. HE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 13.15 LAKHS. ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF UNEXPLAINED BANK DEPOSITS AGGREGATING TO ` 1,59,93,300/ - U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. SHRI RAM BABURAO SALVE 2 THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESSED THE SAME AS BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE A ND ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED SET OFF OF BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES. LEARNED PRINCIPAL LEARNED CIT TOOK THE VIEW THAT ADDITION MADE U/S. 68 OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AS INCOME FROM OT HER SOURCES . ACCORDINGLY, HE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. AFTER ALLOWING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE, LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIT DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ASSESS THE INCOME RELATING TO UNEXPLAINED BANK DEPOSITS UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED THIS ISSUE AND MECHANICALLY ASSESSED UNEXPLAINED BANK DEPOSITS UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS. 5. WE NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY MATERIAL TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID EXAMINE THIS ISSUE AND HAS TAKEN POSSIBLE VIEW OF THE MATTER. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FAILED TO SHOW THAT THE VIEW TAKEN BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. UNDER THESE SET OF FACTS, WE HAVE NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIT. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BE E N PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 29 . 5 .201 7. SD/ - SD/ - (SANDEEP GOSAIN ) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 29 / 5 / 20 1 7 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT SHRI RAM BABURAO SALVE 3 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) PS ITAT, MUMBAI