, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A , MUMBAI , . , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1772/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 2010 ALTAF J MOMIN A-701, ALIABAD SOCIETY, BEHARAM BAUG, JOGESHWARI (W) MUMBAI 400 102 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 24(1)(4) MUMBAI ( ! /ASSESSEE) ( ' / REVENUE) ) P.A. NO. ANJPM2731J ! / ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAM CHAURASIA ' / REVENUE BY SHRI V VIDHYADHAR # '$ % !& / DATE OF HEARING : 07/02/2018 % !& / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 07/02/2018 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17 TH JANUARY 2014 OF THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY SUSTAINING THE ADDITION WITH RESPECT TO C ASH ITA NO.1772/MUM/2014 ALTAF J MOMIN 2 DEPOSIT OF RS 14,70,000/- AND CONSEQUENT ADDITION U/S. 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER THE ACT ). 2. DURING HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE SHRI RAM CHAURASIA FILED BANK STATEMENT AS ON 31 ST MARCH 2009 AND STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT WITH RESPECT TO CASH. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE WENT TO C ANADA IN 2009 AND THE AMOUNT OF RS 26 LACS WAS WITHDRAWN FROM BANK FOR MEDICAL EXIGENCIES (OPERATION OF MOTH ER). IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN A POSITION TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO ANNEXED THE EVIDENCES OF MEDICAL REPORT OF THE MOTHER OF THE AS SESSEE. THE LEARNED DR CONTENDED THAT IT WAS THE DUTY OF TH E ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE BEFORE THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER/CIT(A). 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACT S IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PROFESSIONAL DOCTO R. HE DECLARED INCOME OF RS 1,09,760/- IN HIS RETURN FILE D ON 17 TH APRIL 2009. AS PER INFORMATION WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT OF RS 14,70,000/- IN DEVELOPMENT CREDIT BANK. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED TH E ITA NO.1772/MUM/2014 ALTAF J MOMIN 3 BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELEVANT PER IOD. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CAS H DEPOSITS ON VARIOUS DATES. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TH AT THE CASH OF RS 26,75,500/- WAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED AND CONSEQUENT ADDITION WAS MADE U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. T HE LEARNED CIT(A) AFFIRMED THE STAND OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT HE IS IN A POSITION TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE CASH AND THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN PR OPERLY DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS THE ASSESSEE WAS DISTURBED DUE TO MEDICAL EXIGENCIES. CONSIDERING T HE TOTALITY OF FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MAND ATE OF ARTICLE 265 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS TO LEVY AND COLLECT DUE TAXES. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FURNISH THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE WITH RESPECT TO HIS CLAIM BEFORE THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER AND SOURCE OF THE IMPUGNE D CASH. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE AFRESH IN ACCO RDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF BEI NG HEARD. ITA NO.1772/MUM/2014 ALTAF J MOMIN 4 THUS, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 7 TH FEBRUARY, 2018. SD/- (G. MANJUNATHA) SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER # $ MUMBAI; + DATED : 07 /02/2018 SA %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ,-./ / THE APPELLANT 2. 01./ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 2 2 # 3! , ( ,- ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 2 2 # 3! / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 5'6 0! , 2 ,-& , , # $ / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 7 8$ / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , # $ / ITAT, MUMBAI