ELENJI KAMALIL V. THOMAS, NAVI MUMBAI V. ACIT-28(3), NAVI MUMBAI

ITA 1659/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Elenji Kamalil V. Thomas, the appellant, who challenged the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26 regarding the reassessment proceedings and the addition of Rs. 35,00,000 as unsecured loans under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The reassessment was initiated following a search operation that revealed the assessee's involvement in receiving accommodation entries. The initial appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A), leading to the current appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT found that the assessee had not provided sufficient details during the first appellate stage and decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299212 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 25-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: REMANDING THIS
• Section: 147; 68; 148; 132; 143(3); 73

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI, OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM IT A N o. 1 65 9/ M U M/ 20 23 (As se ss me nt Y ea r: 20 08-09) Elenji Kamalil V. Thomas 212, Vardhaman Chembers, Sector – 17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400703 Vs. ACIT 28(3) 3 rd Floor, Above Vashi Railway Station, Navi Mumbai - 400703 PA N/ GI R No .A AC PE 73 39 L (Appellant) : (Respondent) Assessee by : None. Revenue by : Shri. P. D. Chogule, DR. Dat e of H ea ri ng : 26.07.2023 Dat e of P ro no un ce me nt : 31.07.2023 O R D E R PER KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, J M: 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26 [hereinafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act,1961 [hereinafter “the Act”] relevant to the Assessment Year [hereinafter “the A.Y.”] 2008-09. 2. As there was no representation on behalf of the assessee, we hereby proceed to dispose of this appeal by hearing the Learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue [hereinafter “the Ld. DR”] and on perusal of materials available on record. 2 ITA No. 1659/MUM/2023 ( A . Y .2008-09) ELLENJI KAMALIL V. THOMAS V/S ACIT-28(3) 3. The assessee has challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) failing to condon the delay of 3 days in e-filling the appeal and has also challenged the reassessment proceeding and along with addition of Rs. 35,00,000/- made u/s 68 of the Act towards unsecured loans availed from M/s. Ansh Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. 4. The brief facts are that the assessee was carrying on business under the name and style of “Vicky Electrical Corporation, TJ Builders and E.V. Homes” during the year under consideration. The assessee had filed its return of income declaring total income at Rs. 79,08,700/-. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and assessment order dated 24-12-2010 was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act where the Ld. AO determined total income at Rs. 93,63,260/-. The assessee's case was then reopened u/s 147 of the Act vide notice u/s section 148 of the Act dated 05.03.2015 for the reason that the Ld. AO received the information during the course of search operation u/s 132 of the IT Act on Shri. Praveen Kumar Jain Group wherein it was observed that the assessee was one of the beneficiary of accommodation entry from M/s Ansh Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. amounting to Rs. 35,00,000/- as unsecured loan. The Ld. AO passed the assessment order dated 26.02.2016 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act by making an addition of the impugned amount u/s 68 of the Act as unexplained credit on the ground that the assessee has failed to prove the creditworthiness and the genuineness of the said transaction. 5. The assessee was in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the impugned order. The Ld. CIT(A) vide an exparte order dated 24.03.2023 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 3 ITA No. 1659/MUM/2023 ( A . Y .2008-09) ELLENJI KAMALIL V. THOMAS V/S ACIT-28(3) 6. The assessee is in appeal before us challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival submission and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the Ld. AO had made addition of Rs 35,00,000/- in the hands of the assessee as being beneficiary to the accommodation entry provided by the M/s Ansh Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. which was alleged to be a group entity of Shri. Praveen Kumar Jain operating as accommodation entry provider. It is observed that the assessee has failed to furnish any details pertaining to the said transaction during the First Appellate Authority inspite of several opportunities. In order to adhere to the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to provide one more opportunity to the assessee by remanding this issue back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceeding before the Ld. CIT(A) without any undue delay and the Ld. CIT(A) based on the submissions of the assessee is directed to decide this issue on the merits of the case. 8. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 31.07.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated : 31.07.2023 Aniket Singh Rajput, Stenographer 4 ITA No. 1659/MUM/2023 ( A . Y .2008-09) ELLENJI KAMALIL V. THOMAS V/S ACIT-28(3) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT - concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai