PRAVIN M CHOKSEY, MUMBAI V. DCIT CIR 45, MUMBAI

ITA 1959/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0674 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Next Hearing Date: 10-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Salary income
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 2

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL J BENCH, MUMBAI . , , BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER / I .T.A. NO S . 1959, 1961 & 1962/MUM/2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2002 - 03, 2005 - 06 & 2006 - 07 A N D / I .T.A. NO . 1960/MUM/2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2004 - 05 MR. PRAVIN M. CHOKSEY, C/O VIREN P. CHOKSEY, KRISHNA VILLA, LINKING ROAD, SANTACRUZ (W), MUMBAI - 400 054 / VS. THE DY. CIT (C) CIRCLE - 45, MUMBAI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAEPC 1292J ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: NONE / RESPONDENT BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 13 . 0 5 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 .0 5 .2015 / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THESE FOUR APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAIN TO FOUR DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT YEARS I.E. A.Y. 2002 - 03, 2005 - 06, 2006 - 07 AND 2004 - 05 RESPECTIVELY. ITA NOS. 1959, 1961 & 1962/M/2011 PERTAIN TO LEVY OF MR. PRAVIN M. CHOKSEY 2 PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT AND ITA NO. 1960/M/2011 IS AGAINST THE ORDER MADE U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SEC. 153A OF THE ACT. ALL THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSE OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. FIRST WE TAKE UP THE APPEAL AGAINST LEVY OF PENALTY U/S. 271(1)(C) PERTAINING TO A.YRS 2002 - 03, 2005 - 06 & 2006 - 07. THE LD. CIT(A) - 38, MUMBAI HAS DISPOSED OF THESE APPEALS BY A COMMON ORDER DT. 31.12.2010. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THA T THE INCOME RETURNED IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED U/S. 139(1) OF THE ACT WAS ENHANCED IN THE RETURN FILED U/S. 153A OF THE ACT SUBSEQUENT TO RECEIVING THE NOTICE AFTER THE SEARCH CONDUCTED ON 5.10.2007. THE ADDITIONAL INCOMES DISCLOSED IN THE RETURNS FIL ED U/S. 153A ARE AS UNDER: 2003 - 03 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 INCOME FROM SALARY RS. 24,000/ - RS. 88,000/ - - INCOME FROM BUSINESS RS. 71,218/ - RS.1,02,218/ - - INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAINS - (RS.30,653/ - ) RS. 11,895/ - INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES RS. 46,757/ - RS.1,57,775/ - RS.2,46,261/ - TOTAL RS.1,41,975/ - RS.3,17,359/ - LESS DEDUCTION U/S. CHAPTER VI - A U/S. 80L RS. 8,913/ - RS. 12,000/ - TOTAL RS.1,33,062/ - RS.3,05,359/ - RS.2,58,156/ - 3.1. THE AO WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT BUT FOR THE SEARCH ACTION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, HE WOULD NOT HAVE OFFERED THE ADDITIONAL INCOMES WHICH ARE MADE PART OF THE RETURNS OF INCOME FILED U/S. 153A OF THE ACT. 4. BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THE ASSESSEE TOOK THE PLEA THAT HE WAS OF THE AGE OF ABOUT 80 YEARS SUFFERING FROM ALZAMIERS DISEASE AND BECAUSE OF HIS HEALTH CONDITION HE COULD NOT INCLUDE CERTAIN IN COMES IN MR. PRAVIN M. CHOKSEY 3 THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED U/S. 139(1) OF THE ACT. IT WAS FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT E VEN THE ACCOUNTANT HAVE LEFT THE JOB. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT IS NOT JUSTIFIED. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE REPLY MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. WHILE CONFIRMING THE PENALTY ORDER, THE LD. CIT(A) OBS ERVED THAT THE MANNER IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED THE CORRECT INCOME IN THE RETURNS OF INCOME FILED U/S. 139(1) OF THE ACT LEADS TO A INFERENCE THAT ALTHOUGH THE APPELLANT WAS AWARE OF THE FULL PARTICULARS OF INCOME, HE HAD FAILED TO SUBMIT RETURNS OF INCOME BY DISCLOSING THE ENTIRE INCOME EARNED BY HIM UNDER DIFFERENT HEADS OF INCOME. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE DATE OF HEARING. THE LD. DR FILED W RITTEN SUBMISSION. 7. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE DR. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS DT. 24.12.2009. WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS A MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. PANCHGANI HEALTH RESORT PVT. LTD. , FROM WHERE HE WAS DRAWING REMUNERATION . I N ADDITION TO THAT HE WAS ALSO CARRYING OUT INVESTMENT IN SHARES AS WELL AS COMMISSION FROM SALE OF MOTOR CAR DEALING. THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS DT. 31.12.2010 AND BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY, THE ASSESSEE TOOK THE PLEA OF ALZ AM IERS. THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT IN THE INTERVENING ONE YEAR , THE ASSESSEE WAS SO ILL THAT HE FORGOT TO DISCLOSE THE COMPLETE DETAILS OF HIS INCOME. AFTER GIVING A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO TH E FACTS ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT IF THE SEARCH ACTION HAD NOT BEEN CONDUCTED, THE ADDITIONAL INCOME DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN FILED PURSUANT TO THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 153A OF THE ACT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN OFFERED FOR THE PURPOSE MR. PRAVIN M. CHOKSEY 4 OF TAXA TION BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ARE THEREFORE CONVINCED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME/ PREMEDITATEDLY CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. WE, THEREFORE DECLINE TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF TH E LD. CIT(A). PENALTY LEVIED U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR A.Y. 2002 - 03, 2005 - 06 AND 2006 - 07 ARE HEREBY CONFIRMED. ALL THESE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 8. IN ITA NO. 1960/M/2011 FOR A.Y. 2004 - 05 THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,50,000/ - MADE BY THE AO IN RESPECT OF ONE VEHICLE OWNED BY AND BELONGING TO SHRI RAJNASH BHEL. WHILE SCRUTINIZING THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE BANK CREDIT ENTRIES ON 23.5.2003 AMOUNTIN G TO RS. 6,50,000/ - . THE ASSESSEE FILED FOLLOWING EXPLANATION: THE ABOVE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED BY A DEMAND DRAFT FROM MR. KETAN MEHTA OF SETH MINAAR, B WING, 3 RD FLOOR OPPOSITE JASLOK HOSPITAL, PEDDER ROAD, MUMBAI. AS SALE PRICE OF ONE VEHICLE BEARING NO. MZE 2002 BELONGING TO LATE MR. RAJNASH BHEL OF SAGAR SANGEET BLDG., COLABA. THE VEHICLE WAS LYING WITH ME UNDER REPAIRS FOR LONG TIME SINCE 2001 AND UNFORTUNAT ELY DURING THIS PERIOD MR. RAJNASH BHEL EXPIRED ON 3 RD AUGUST, 2004. I HAS INFORMED HIS SON MR. MONISH BHEL WHO DUE TO OUR GOOD RELATION HAVE STILL NOT COLLECTED THE SAME AMOUNT. HENCE, THE SAME LIES DEPOSITED WITH ME. 9. THIS EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIND ANY FAVOUR WITH THE AO , WHO OBSERVED THAT AFTER THE SALE OF CAR AND BEFORE THE DEATH OF SHRI RAJNASH BHEL AND DURING THE INTERVENING PERIOD OF 15 MONTHS , THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PAY THE AMOUNT TO SHRI RAJNASH BHEL. THE AO FURTHER OBSERV ED THAT EVEN TILL THE DATE OF ASSESSMENT, THE AMOUNT HAS NOT BEEN PAID. THE AO TREATED RS, 6,50,000/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. MR. PRAVIN M. CHOKSEY 5 10. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. 11. AGGRIEVED BY THIS THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. DR HAS FILED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION. 12. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION AND GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE MAIN CONTENTI ON OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE VEHICLE BELONGS TO SHRI RAJNASH BHEL , WHICH WAS SOLD AND THE SALE CONSIDERATION WAS CREDITED IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT. NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FILED IN RESPECT OF THIS CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, WE FIND THAT THE VEHICL E WAS SOLD IN THE YEAR 2003. WE ARE IN THE YEAR 2015 . E VEN AFTER A LAPSE OF 12 YEARS , THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO PROVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID THE AMOUNT TO THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED RAJNASH BHEL. AS THE ASSESSEE HAS GROSSLY FAILED IN DISCHA RGING THE INITIAL ONUS CAST UPON HIM TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). WE, ACCORDINGLY CONFIRM THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,50,000/ - AND DISMISS ASSESSEES APPEAL. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH MAY , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( D.MANMOHAN ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /VICE PRESIDENT / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 20 TH MAY , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS MR. PRAVIN M. CHOKSEY 6 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI