MADAN SING B. BHARARA, MUMBAI V. ACIT WD 8(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1658/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0600 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 05-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHARAM VEER SINGHDR
• Assessee Lawyers: VIPUL J SHAHAR
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

, , , , INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL -GBENCH MUMBAI , , , , , , ,, , BEFORE S/SHRI RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SAKTIJIT DEY,JUDICIAL MEMBER / ITA NO.1658/MUM/2011: /ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-08 SARDAR MADAN SINGH BHARARA GROUND FLOOR, SANTOSH NIWAS FIROZ SHAH ROAD, SANTACRUZ WEST MUMBAI-400 054. PAN:AADCM 4220 G VS. ACIT-RANGE -8(1) MUMBAI. REV ENUE BY: SHRI DHARAM VEER SINGH-DR ASS ESSEE BY: SHRI VIPUL J. SHAH-AR / DATE OF HEARING: 05/06/2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:05/06/2017 ,1961 254(1) ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) , / PER RAJENDRA A.M. - CHALLENGING THE ORDER,DTD.07/12/2010,OF THE CIT(A)- 16,MUMBAI,THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL.ASSESSEE,AN INDIVIDUAL,IS A DIRECTOR OF A COMPANY.HE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 20/12/2007,DECLARING INCOME AT RS.17.60 LAKHS.TH E ASSESSING OFFICER(AO)COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT,ON 30/12/ 2009,DET ERMINING HIS INCOME AT RS.70.82 LAKHS. BRIEF FACTS: 2.IT IS A RECALLED MATTER.EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEA L IS ABOUT ADDITION OF RS. 52.73 LAKHS, BEING INTEREST RECEIVED ON FDR.S.DURING THE ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD EARNED BANK INTEREST OF RS.52,73,706/- , THAT AGAINST THE INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED HE HAS CLAIMED SET OFF OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE OF R S. 57.18 LAKHS. HE DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE ALLOWABLITY OF INTEREST PAID AGAINST TH E INTEREST RECEIPT AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE,THE AO HELD THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAD PAID INTEREST ON THE LOAN TAKEN FROM THE BANK, THAT THE INTEREST PAID COULD NOT BE ALLOWED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 57 OF THE ACT. HE DISALLOWED THE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASS ESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE AO, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST A PPELLATE AUTHORITY (FAA), WHO CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO. 3. THE ASSESSEE AGITATED THE MATTER BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L.VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 31/05/2016 (ITA/ 1658/MUM/2011),THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE FILED A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION AND STATED THAT THE ASSES SEE HAD FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES IN THE 1658/MUM/11-MADAN SINGH 2 PAPER BOOK AND HAD REQUESTED FOR ADMISSION OF THE S AME AS PER THE APPLICATION DATED 29/02/2016, THAT RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE ASSESSM ENT RECORDS FOR THE AY.S 2006-07 AND 2008-09,THAT INTEREST ON LOAN WAS ALLOWABLE AS A DE DUCTION. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THE TRIBUNAL RECALLED ITS ORDER. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US,THE AUTHORIS ED REPRESENTATIVE(AR) STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE AN APPLICATION FOR ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, THAT EVIDENCES PROVED THAT CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WAS GENUINE AND ALLOWABLE, THAT IN THE SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES THE AO HAD ACCEPTED THE STAND TAKEN B Y THE ASSESSEE IN THE EARLIER YEARS. HE REFERRED TO THE DOCUMENTS LISTED AT SERIAL NUMBER 7 15 OF THE INDEX OF THE PAPER BOOK IN HIS SUPPORT. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) LEFT THE ISSUE TO THE DISCRETION OF THE BENCH. 5. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE APPLICATION FILED FOR ADM ITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND THE DOCUMENTS FURNISHED AS NEW EVIDENCES. IN OUR OPINIO N,THE DOCUMENTS ARE IMPORTANT TO DECIDE THE ISSUE BEFORE US.AS THE SAME WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY AO/FAA WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER/DECIDING THE APPEAL, SO, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A O FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. HE IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL E VIDENCES FILED BEFORE US AND AFFORDING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY INTO THE ASSESSEE. EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL, RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DECIDED IN HIS FAVOUR, IN PART. AS A RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS PA RTLY ALLOWED. . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH JUNE, 2017. 05 , 2017 SD/- SD/- ( / SAKTIJIT DEY ) ( / RAJENDRA ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; /DATED : 05/06/2017. JV.SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT / 2. RESPONDENT / 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / 5. DR BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / , , . . . 6. GUARD FILE/ //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI.