SHASHI KUMAR SINGH, MUMBAI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1893/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8441 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 26-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NISHANT SAMAIYA
• Keywords: Document seized; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 234B; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1892 & 1893 /MUM/201 8 (A.Y S : 2011 - 12 & 2013 - 14 ) SHASHI KUMAR SINGH 7 STAR CARGO AND COURIER , ROOM NO. 9, 1 ST FLOOR, BUILDING NO. 159/3, CABL E CROSS LANE, DR. VIKAS STREET, OPP. SWADESHI MARKET, KALBADEVI 400 002 PAN: CMWPS 4812 G V. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2( 4) ROOM NO. 802, 8 TH FLOOR, PRATISTHA BHAWAN , M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI NISHANT SAMAIYA DATE OF HEARING : 18.02 .2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05 .04 .2019 O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD (JM) 1. THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011 - 12 AND 2013 - 14. 2. THESE APPEALS WERE POSTED FOR HEARING ON SEVERAL DATES AND N ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN ANY OF THE OCCASIONS W HEN THE APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 29.05.2018, 30.07.2018, 27.08.2018, 06.09.2018, 07.09.2018, 29.10.2018, 29.11.2018, 0 9.01.2019 AND 2 ITA NO. 1892 & 1893/MUM/2018 (A.YS: 2011 - 12 & 2013 - 14) SHASHI KUMAR SINGH 18.02.2019 . WHEN THE MATTER WAS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 09.01.2019 THE BENCH DIRECTED TO SERVE NOTICE BY ISSUE OF RPAD. THE NOTICE WAS SERVED TO THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER ON 18.02.2019 IN SPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE , ASSESSEE DID NOT CHO O SE TO REPRESENT THESE APPEALS. THUS, I DISPOSE OF F TH ESE APPEALS ON HEARING THE LD.DR. 3. AT THE OUTSET, ON PERUSAL OF THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED GROUNDS OF APPEAL CHALLE NG ING THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A). THE GROUNDS FILED ALONG WITH THE APPEAL I.E. FORM NO .36 READ AS UNDER: - ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 : - 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE JCIT (OSD ) CC - 2(4) IS BAD - IN - LAW AND REQUIRED TO BE QUASHED AS IT IS PASSED AGAINST THE PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICES. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND IN LAW, LD. JOI NT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION IN TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSEE RS.624673 WHICH IS TOTALLY WRONG 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND IN LAW LD. JCIT FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT : - A) ADDITION IS MADE DURING THIS YEAR, BASE D ON 2 MONTH DOCUMENT SEIZED FOR THE PERIOD 21.08.2010 TO 23.10.2010 AS PER ORDER, IS TOTALLY WRONG BECAUSE DOCUMENTS RECEIVED IS RELATED TO ASSESSEE BUT WHAT IS WRITTEN ON THAT CHALLAN AS ROUGH WORKING IS NOT RELATED TO ASSESSEE BUSINESS. B) ADDITION CANN OT BE MADE ON PRESUMPTION BASIS. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND IN LAW, LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S. 234B & 234C OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961. 5. THE ASSESSEE CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD FURTHER GROUNDS OR TO AMEND OR ALTER THE EX ISTING GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 : - 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE JCIT (OSD) CC - 2(4) IS BAD - IN - LAW AND REQUIRED TO BE QUASHED AS IT IS PASSED AGAINST THE PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICES. 3 ITA NO. 1892 & 1893/MUM/2018 (A.YS: 2011 - 12 & 2013 - 14) SHASHI KUMAR SINGH 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND IN LAW, LD. JCIT (OSD) CC - 2(4) MADE ADDITION IN TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSE RS.857800 WHICH IS TOTALLY WRONG 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND IN LAW LD. DCIT FAILED TO AP PRECIATE THAT : - A) ADDITION IS MADE DURING THIS YEAR IS BASED ON 2 MONTH DOCUMENT SEIZED FOR THE PERIOD 21.08.2010 TO 23.10.2010 WHICH IS TOTALLY WRONG BECAUSE DOCUMENTS RECEIVED IS RELATED TO ASSESSEE BUT WHAT IS WRITTEN ON THAT CHALLAN AS RUF WORKING IS NOT RELATED TO ASSESSEE BUSINESS. B) ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE ON PRESUMPTION BASIS. 4. THE ASSESSEE CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD FURTHER GROUNDS OR TO AMEND OR ALTER THE EXISTING GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING. 4. ASSESSEE ALSO FILED STATEMENT S OF FACTS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL STATING AS UNDER: ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 : - 1. APPELLANT IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF COURIER. 2. APPELLANT HAD E - FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,91,185/ - 3. CASE OF APPELLANT BECAUSE OF SEARCH AND ACCORDINGLY ASSESSMENT ORDER IS PASSED ON 23/01/2018 AT ASSESSED INCOME OF RS.7,83,760/ - . 4. FURTHER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S. 234B &234C OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 5. THUS, BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ID. DCIT APPELLANT PREFERRED PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE YOUR HONOUR FOR THE JUSTICE. 6. THE APPELLANT RESERVES ITS RIGHT TO FURNISH DETAILED SUBMISSIONS WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE CASE. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14: - 1. APPELLANT IS A N INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF COURIER. 2. APPELLANT HAD E - FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.233548/ - . 3. CASE OF APPELLANT BECAUSE OF SEARCH AND ACCORDINGLY ASSESSMENT ORDER IS PASSED ON 23/01/2018 AT ASSESSED INCOME OF RS.857800/ - . 4. FURTHER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S. 234B &234C OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961. 5. THUS, BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ID. DCIT APPELLANT PREFERRED PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE YOUR HONOUR FOR THE JUSTICE. 6. THE APPELLANT RESERVES ITS RIGHT TO FURNISH DETAILED SUBMISSIONS WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE CASE. 4 ITA NO. 1892 & 1893/MUM/2018 (A.YS: 2011 - 12 & 2013 - 14) SHASHI KUMAR SINGH 5. ON A PERUSAL OF THE GROUNDS AND STATEMENTS OF FACTS, I FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) BUT HOWEVER CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. SINCE, THERE ARE NO GROUNDS OF APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) BY TH E ASSESSEE, I DISMISS THESE APPEALS IN LIMINE AS DEFECTIVE APPEALS . 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 05 TH APRIL , 2019 SD / - (C.N. PRASAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI / DATED 05 / 0 4 / 201 9 GIRIDHAR , S R. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUM