SARVESH RAMCHANDRA SINGH, MUMBAI V. ITO 19(3)4, MUMBAI

ITA 2156/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1003 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B S BIST
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 133(6); 68; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH E MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO. 2156/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 MR. SARVESH RAMCHANDRA SINGH VS. ITO 19(3)4 11/1A GALA NO. 12, SEVALAL SEVA IT OFFICES, PIRA MAL CHAMBERS SANGH, DHYANESHWAR NAGAR, BANDRA (E) LALBAUG, PARE L MUMBAI 400051 MUMBAI - 400012 PAN NO. BAPPS3478G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY: SHRI B.S. BIST, DR DATE OF HEARING : 13/0 2/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24/04/2017 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVA NT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2008-09. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) 18, MUMBAI AND ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER U/S 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT). 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE READ AS UNDER:- I. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL. II. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EXPAR TE WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN THE MATTER. ITA NO. 2156/MUM/2013 2 III. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHO UT APPRECIATING FULLY AND PROPERLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IV. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE A.O. IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 13,92,684/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CRE DIT U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. 3. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME OF THE A .Y. 2008-09 ON 30.07.2008 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,15,843/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) NOTICED FROM THE AIR INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED CASH IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT TO THE T UNE OF RS.11,41,770/-. AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION, THE ASS ESSEE WAS HAVING A SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WITH THE MUMBAI DISTRICT CENTR AL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND IT WAS NOT DISCLOSED. THE AO ISSUED N OTICE U/S 133(6) DATED 10.11.2010 TO THE ABOVE BANK. THE CONCERNED B ANK SUBMITTED A STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FOR THE RELEVANT PERIOD TO T HE AO. AS PER THE SAID BANK STATEMENT, THE DETAILS IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: CASH CREDITS RS.11,17,470/ - CHEQUE CREDITS RS.2,74,220/ - INTEREST CREDITED RS.994/ - TOTAL RS.13,92,684/ - 3.1 THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 143(2) DATED 06.08.200 9 TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS DULY SERVED. FURTHER, NOTICES /Q UESTIONNAIRES DATED 01.07.2010 WERE SENT BY THE AO TO THE ASSESSE E BY SPEED POST WHICH WAS SERVED ON 19.07.2010. THERE WAS NO RESPON SE BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE ABOVE NOTICES. BECAUSE OF NON-COMPL IANCE, THE AO IMPOSED PENALTY OF RS.10,000/- U/S 271(1)(B) ON 29. 11.2010. THE AO GAVE THE ASSESSEE LAST CHANCE VIDE LETTER DATED 24. 11.2010 TO SHOW ITA NO. 2156/MUM/2013 3 CAUSE AS TO WHY THE ASSESSMENT SHOULD NOT BE COMPLE TED U/S 144 OF THE ACT AND THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 30.11 .2010. AS THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE BY THE ASSESSEE OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NEITHER DECLARED THE ABOVE AMOUNT, NOR SUBMITTED ANY DETAILS ABOUT T HE SAID ENTRIES, THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.13,92,684/- TREATING IT AS UNEXPLAINED MONEY WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 69A OF THE ACT. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE AO, THE ASSESSEE F ILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) NEITHE R THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED. THE LD. CIT (A) OBSERVED THAT IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HIM, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT SUBMIT ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF ENTRIES IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) AGREED WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE AO AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 13.02.2017 BEF ORE THE TRIBUNAL. NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATI VE APPEARED BEFORE US. 6. THE LD. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.13,92,684/- MADE BY T HE AO U/S 69A OF THE ACT. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RELEVAN T MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE REGISTRY FIXED THE CASE OF HEARING ON 13.02.2017 BY SENDING THE NOTICE THROUGH RPAD. THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED ON 03.10.2016. THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED IT ON 0 4.10.2016 AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE SIGNATURE ON THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S LIP. NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ITA NO. 2156/MUM/2013 4 7.1. THE LAW IS WELL SETTLED THAT THE ONUS OF PROVI NG THE SOURCE OF A SUM OF MONEY FOUND TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS ON HIM. IF HE DISPUTES THE LIABILITY TO TAX, IT IS FOR HIM TO SHOW EITHER THAT THE RECEIPT WAS NOT INCOME OR THAT, IF IT WERE, IT WAS EXEMPT FOR TAXATION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH PROOF, THE REVENUE IS ENTITLED TO TREAT IT AS TAXABLE INCOME. IT HAS BEEN HELD SO IN GORDHANDAS HARGOVANDAS VS. CIT (1980) 126 ITR 560 (BOM); MOHANLAL PAREKH (D) VS. CIT (1984) 148 ITR 131 (MAD); CIT VS. BIMAL PARKASH GUPTA (1989) 179 ITR 613 (P&H). THE ASSESSEE IN THE INSTA NT CASE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE ONUS CAST UPON HIM. 8. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID REASONS, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/04/2017 SD/- SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) (N.K. PRADHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R MUMBAI: DATED: 24/04/2017 RAHUL, SR. P.S. 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