VRUJLAL K. VAISHALI, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 24(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1936/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 84494 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 8 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 24-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAWAN KU MAR BEERLA
• Assessee Lawyers: M SUBRAMANIAN
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

, , , , , ,, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES F, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1936/MUM/2010 (AY: 2006-07) MR. VRUJLAL K. VAISHNANI, 21, VEENA BEENA, GR. FL. OPP.BANDRA RLY. STN. BANDRA(W), MUMBAI-400050 ! ! ! ! / VS. ITO, WARD-24(3)(4), PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA-KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA(E), MUMBAI-400051 ( #$ / // / APPELLANT) ( %&#$ / RESPONDENT) P.A. NO.AAEPV7846D #$ ' ( ' ( ' ( ' ( /APPELLANT BY : SHRI M. SUBRAMANIAN %&#$ ' ( ' ( ' ( ' ( /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PAWAN KUMAR BEERLA ! ' )* / // / DATE OF HEARING : 03/12/2014 +,- ' )* / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03 /12 /2014 . . . . / / / / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JM) : THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DAT ED 15/12/2009 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS SEVEN GROUNDS OF APP EAL BUT ALL ARE IN NARRATIVE FORMS. THE ASSESSEE HAS MIXED UP FACTS AND THE GROUNDS. IDENTICAL WAS THE SITUATION BEFORE THE LD . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) . THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUN D, IF ANY, CAN ITA NO.1936/MUM/2010 2 BE SAID TO BE GROUND NO.6 WHICH PERTAINS TO INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY (RS. 42,000/-), ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF HIG HER CHARGES (RS.16,68,279/-) AND UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AMOUNT ING TO RS.15,80,000/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED PAPER BOOK RUNNING INTO 186 PAGES. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLICAT ION CLAIMING NEW EVIDENCES WHICH COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE TH E REVENUE AUTHORITIES ON THE REASONS STATED IN THE APPLICATIO N. 2.1. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI M. SUBR AMANIAN, DURING HEARING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL, REQUESTED FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED FOR THE FIRST TIME ON TH E PLEA THAT SUCH EVIDENCES GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE ISSUE. THE LD. D R, SHRI PAWAN KUMAR BEERLA OPPOSED ADMISSION OF THE APPLICATION O N THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE KNOWINGLY DID NOT FILE THE SE EVIDENCES EITHER BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR BEFORE THE L D. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 2.2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND P ERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WITHOUT GOING INTO M UCH DELIBERATION/MERITS OF THE CASE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT NO PERSON SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD. AT THE SAME TIME, SINCE THE IM PUGNED DOCUMENTS, ATTACHED IN THE PAPER BOOK, WERE NOT FIL ED BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, THEREFORE, IT IS THE BOUNDED D UTY OF THIS TRIBUNAL THAT TO SAFEGUARD THE INTEREST OF BOTH SID ES THESE DOCUMENTS REQUIRES EXAMINATION. WE ADMIT THE ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCE. HOWEVER, SINCE SUCH EVIDENCE REQUIRES EXAMINATION, CONSEQUENTLY, WE REMAND THIS FILE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDED IN ITA NO.1936/MUM/2010 3 ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) IS FREE TO CALL REMAND REPORT, IF SO DESI RED, FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED T O ASSIST THE OFFICE OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS) FOR EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL AND NOT TO SEEK ADJOURNMENT BEFORE HIM WITHOUT ANY COGENT REASON. IF, THERE IS NON-COOPER ATION FROM THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS) IS FREE TO PROCEED AND DECIDE THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATER IAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS THUS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION O F THE HEARING ON 03 RD DECEMBER, 2014 . . ' +,- /!0 03.12.2014 , ' 7 SD/- SD/- (SANJAY ARORA) (JOGINDER SINGH) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; /! DATED : 03 RD DECEMBER, 2014. F{X~{T? P.S/. !.. . ' %)8 98-) . ' %)8 98-) . ' %)8 98-) . ' %)8 98-)/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. #$ / THE APPELLANT 2. %&#$ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. : ( ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. : / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI ITA NO.1936/MUM/2010 4 5. 8=7 %)! , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 7> ? / GUARD FILE. .! .! .! .! / BY ORDER, &8) %) //TRUE COPY// @ @@ @/ // /A B A B A B A B (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI