ACIT 19(3), MUMBAI V. VASUDEV DATWANI, MUMBAI

ITA 2280/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6299 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 03-11-2010
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SU RENDRA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S C TIWARI
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Gift; Salary income; Source of fund; Onus to prove
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'F' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.V. EASWAR, PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2280/MUM/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05) ACIT - 19(3) SHRI ISHU VASUDEV DATWANI ROOM NO. 305, 3RD FLOOR C/O. ANMOL JEWELLERS, KAKAD PALACE PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL VS. TURNER ROAD, BANDRA (W) MUMBAI 400012 MUMBAI 400050 PAN - AABPD 2417 M APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI SURENDRA KUMAR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.C. TIWARI O R D E R PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) XIX, MUMBAI DATED 21.01.2009. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IS WITH REFERENCE TO THE FOREIGN GIFT OF ` 20 LAKHS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE TREATED AS UNEXPL AINED INCOME BY THE A.O. BUT DELETED BY THE CIT(A). 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE, A PARTNER IN THE FIRM M/S. ANMOL JEWELLERS, DERIVES INCOME FROM SALARY FROM THE FIRM , CAPITAL GAINS AND VALUATION CHARGES FROM CUSTOMERS. THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF ` 20 LAKHS AS GIFT STATED TO BE FROM AN NRI. VIDE LET TER DATED 21.08.2006 THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF GIFT, I.E. IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND RELATIONSHIP GIVING COMPLETE ADDRESS. THE A.O. ALSO NOTICED THAT SUCH GIFTS ARE RECEIVED BY T HE MINORS, PRATIK AND TRISTA DATWANI. IN REPLY THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED ANN EXURE WITH REFERENCE TO THE CHEQUES RECEIVED FROM ONE MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJNA NI. ON NOTICING THAT IT WAS NOT ISSUED FROM MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANIS ACCOU NT BUT A PAY ORDER FROM HABIB BANK AG ZURICH, DUBAI FOR INDIAN ` 2 MILLION DRAWN ON BANK OF INDIA, OVERSEAS BRANCH, MUMBAI, INDIA, THE A.O. VID E HIS LETTER DATED 13.11.2006 ASKED SOME MORE DETAILS, PARTICULARLY WI TH REFERENCE TO THE GENUINENESS, IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE P ERSON FROM WHOM THE ITA NO. 2280/MUM/2009 SHRI ISHU VASUDEV DATWANI 2 ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED GIFT OF ` 20 LAKHS. SINCE THE DETAILS WERE NOT GIVEN ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN AND ASSESSEE WAS ASKE D ALSO INFORMED THAT THERE WERE CREDITS OF ` 9,54,500/- AND ` 5,68,902/- IN EARLIER TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS AS GIFTS RECEIVED FROM ONE MR. KRIPALANI. IN RESPONSE TO THAT THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 27.11.2006 ENCLOSED COPY OF THE PASSPORT AND COMMERCIAL LICENCE BY UNITED ARAB EMIRATES IN SUPPO RT OF DOING BUSINESS IN DUBAI. THE A.O. DID NOT ACCEPT THE GENUINENESS OF G IFT AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PERSON AND SINCE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROD UCE ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE CAPACITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONOR, REL YING ON THE CASE LAWS OF D.C. RASTOGI VS. ACIT 57 ITD 295, LAL CHAND KABRA V S. CIT 22 CTR 135, ITO VS. DR. A.K. SHARMA 63 TTJ 830 AND ALSO NOTICING FR OM THE RECORDS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS IN THE HABIT OF RECEIVING GIFTS EVERY YEAR, THE AMOUNT OF ` 20 LAKHS WAS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE I.T. ACT. ASSESSEE CONTESTED THE SAME BEF ORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A), AFTER ANALYSING THE PROVISIONS GOVERNING GIFT, PART ICULARLY THE PARAMETERS OF IDENTITY OF THE DONOR, GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTI ON, CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONOR AND ESTABLISHING THE PRINCIPLES IN PARA 1.5 O F THE ORDER EXAMINED THE ISSUE AND DELETED THE ADDITION VIDE PARA 1.6, AS UN DER: - 1.6 APPLIED TO THE FACTS OF THIS CASE, IT IS OBSER VED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS FILED THE RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM DONORS PASSPOR T TO PROVE ITS IDENTITY, WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO. THE GIFT HAS BEE N GIVEN BY MR. AHOK KUMAR SAJNANI, PAYMENTS OF PAY ORDER OF HABIB BANK, A.G. ZURICH DRAWN ON BANK OF INDIA IN THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT . THUS, IT WAS FROM THE BANKING CHANNELS AND AMENABLE TO CORROBORATION. THE DONOR HAD BEEN RUNNING A RETAIL OUTLET IN DUBAI FOR WHICH HE HAD BEEN GIVEN A COMMERCIAL LICENCE SINCE 19.10.1979 BY THE GOVERNME NT OF DUBAI. HIS BUSINESS IS BEING RUN UNDER THE TRADE NAME OF GIVE AND TAKE TRADING ENTERPRISES (LLC). THE COPY OF THE SAID LICENCE FU RNISHED BEFORE THE AO WAS ALSO PRODUCED BEFORE ME. DUBAI IS KNOWN FOR ITS COMMERCIAL SHOPS AND ESTABLISHMENTS AND ATTRACTS WEALTHY TOURISTS FR OM ALL OVER THE WORLD, AND RUNNING A BUSINESS THERE MORE THAN PRIMA FACIE DISCHARGES THE ONUS OF CAPACITY AND CREDIT WORTHINESS. THUS, O N THE FACTS OF THIS CASE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE APPELLANT HAS FAIL ED TO DISCHARGE ITS INITIAL ONUS. THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE AO ON SUBJECTIVE GROUNDS WITHOUT BRINGING ANY FRESH ADDITIONAL MATER IAL, WHICH IS ADVERSE TO THE APPELLANT. .. 3. CONTESTING THE ABOVE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A), IT WAS THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED D.R. THAT NO RELATIONSHIP WAS ESTABLISH ED BETWEEN SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI AND THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF SPECIFIC ALLY ASKING VIDE LETTER ITA NO. 2280/MUM/2009 SHRI ISHU VASUDEV DATWANI 3 DATED 21.08.2006. IT WAS ALSO ON RECORD THAT THE AS SESSEE WAS IN THE HABIT OF RECEIVING GIFTS EVERY YEAR FROM NRIS AND THE ASSESS EE HAS NOT DISCHARGED THE BURDEN OF PROOF. IT WAS HIS SUBMISSION THAT COPY OF THE PASSPORT AND THE PHOTO COPY OF THE PAY ORDER AND THE LICENCE OF THE COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT DOES NOT ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTI ON AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONOR. THE CIT(A) ALSO DELETED ON CERTAIN PR ESUMPTIONS THAT IF A PERSON IS DOING BUSINESS IN DUBAI THE SAME PRIMA FA CIE DISCHARGES THE ONUS OF CAPACITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS. HE RELIED ON THE PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED BY THE ITAT IN THE CASE OF DR. MRS. RENU GUPTA VS. DCI T 72 ITD 306. IT IS ALSO FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT RECEIPT THROUGH BANKING CHAN NELS DOES NOT ESTABLISH CREDITWORTHINESS AND RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. P. MOHANKALA 291 ITR 278 (SC). HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCHARGED THE BURDEN OF PROOF GENUINENESS OF THE GIFT AND RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE P&H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF JASPAL SINGH VS. CIT 290 ITR 306. IT WAS HIS SUBMIS SION THAT THE CIT(A) WAS WRONG IN DELETING THE ADDITION SO MADE WITHOUT ESTA BLISHING THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION ON LEGAL PRINCIPLES ALONE. 4. THE LEARNED COUNSEL IN REPLY OBSERVED THAT THE GROU NDS ITSELF ARE PER SE WRONG AS THE ISSUE OF LOVE AND AFFECTION BETWEEN THE DONOR AND THE DONEE WAS NEVER AN ISSUE BEFORE THE A.O. IT IS FURTHER PO INTED OUT THAT THE A.O. HAS NOT SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR ANY DETAILS AND HE HAS E NQUIRED ABOUT THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS AND RELATIONSHIP GENERALLY AND HAS NOT MADE ANY SPECIFIC ENQUIRIES. THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED SU FFICIENT EVIDENCE ACCORDING TO ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF T HE TRANSACTION AND REITERATED THAT THE MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL. IT WAS HIS CONTENTION THAT THE A.O. MADE ADDITION ON A SSUMPTIONS, SURMISES AND SUSPICION AND THERE IS NO PROOF AGAINST THE ASS ESSEE AND RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) IN DELETING THE SAID CASH CRED IT. HE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF UDH AVDAS KEWALRAM VS. CIT 140 ITR 392 AND FURTHER THE DECISION OF THE HON 'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. TANIA INVESTMENT P. LTD. 322 ITR 394 IN SUPPORT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AND EXAMINED THE RECOR D. AS SEEN FROM THE PAPER BOOK FILED IN THIS REGARD THE ASSESSEE HA S MADE ONLY A WRITTEN ITA NO. 2280/MUM/2009 SHRI ISHU VASUDEV DATWANI 4 SUBMISSION WITHOUT FURNISHING ANY EVIDENCE WITH REF ERENCE TO ESTABLISHING THE GENUINENESS OF THE GIFT TRANSACTION. IT IS WORT H EXTRACTING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE CIT(A) FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECORD, WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS: - APPELLANT IS A PARTNER IN ANMOL JEWELLERS & ANMOL EXPORTS. HIS SOURCE OF INCOME ARE REMUNERATION OF RS.22,35,402/- FROM T HE SAID FIRM, SHARE OF PROFIT OF RS.47,43,527/- FROM THE TWO FIRMS, VAL UATION CHARGES RECEIVED FROM CUSTOMERS, CAPITAL GAINS ETC. THE ONLY POINT I NVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS THE ADDITION OF RS.20,00,000/- MADE BY THE A.O. REGARDING FOREIGN GIFT RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT. THE GIFT HAD BEEN GIVEN BY ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI BY MEANS OF PAY ORDER OF HABIB BANK A.G. ZURICH DR AWN ON BANK OF INDIA IN THE NAME OF APPELLANT (COPY ENCLOS ED). THUS SOURCE OF THE AMOUNT IS EXPLAINED. A COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXT RACT FROM DONORS PASSPORT IS SUBMITTED TO PROVE HIS IDENTITY. A COPY OF THE COMMERCIAL LICENSE ISSUED BY UAE, DUBAI IN APPELLANTS IS SUBM ITTED PROVE CREDIT WORTHINESS. A.O. HAS ADDED THE AMOUNT ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS. A.O.S CONTENTION REMARKS ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE CAPACITY AND CREDIT WORTHINESS OF DONOR DONOR IS RUNNING A SHOP IN DUBAI SINCE 1979. A COPY OF COMMERCIAL LICENSE ISSUED BY DUBAI GOVT. IS SUBMITTED. CHEQUE WAS NOT ISSUED FROM DONORS ACCOUNT THE GIFT CAME THROUGH BANK ORDERS. COPY IS SUBMITTED. 6. AS SEEN FROM THE ABOVE STATEMENTS AND ENCLOSED COMM ERCIAL LICENCE OF ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI AND PHOTOCOPY OF THE PAY ORDER IN PAGE 6 OF THE PAPER BOOK, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS N OT DISCHARGED THE BURDEN PLACED ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE GIFT TRANSACTION. IT MAY BE TRUE THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED A PAY ORDER DATED 21 ST JANUARY 2004 BUT IT WAS ISSUED BY SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI, AS S TATED, HAS NOT BEEN LINKED AT ALL. NEITHER THE ACCOUNT COPY OF THE PERS ON NOR THE SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR PURCHASING THE PAY ORDER HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AT ALL. THERE IS NO CONFIRMATION FROM THE SAID PERSON ON RE CORD EITHER BEFORE THE A.O. OR BEFORE THE CIT(A) OR EVEN BEFORE US THAT SH RI ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI HAS GIFTED THE AMOUNT TO THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THE C ONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI, BY MEANS OF PAY ORDE R OF HABIB BANK DRAWN ON BANK OF INDIA IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE GAVE THE GIFT AND IT WAS ITA NO. 2280/MUM/2009 SHRI ISHU VASUDEV DATWANI 5 SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND GENUINE NESS OF THE TRANSACTION. WE ARE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE BASIS ON WHICH THE CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED THESE CONTENTIONS AND DELETED THE ADDITION. FIRST O F ALL THE GIFT HAS TO BE GIVEN BY SOME PERSON, A DONOR, AND IT HAS TO BE REC EIVED BY THE DONEE AND IN CONFIRMATION OF THE SAID TRANSACTION, THERE SHOULD BE SOME GIFT DEED/ DOCUMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE GIFT INDICATING THE DONE E, THE DONOR AND THE MODE OF GIFT AND THE OCCASION OR REASON FOR GIFT. N OTHING WAS PLACED ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID ASHOK KUMAR SA JNANI HAS GIVEN THE GIFT TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT H E RECEIVED THE GIFT FROM THE SAID PERSON WITHOUT ESTABLISHING THAT THE SAID PERS ON HAS INDEED GIVEN THE GIFT. PRIMA FACIE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE AMO UNT WAS GIFT FROM SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI. THE COPY OF THE PASSPORT AND T HE COMMERCIAL LICENCE MAY ESTABLISH THE NAME OF ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI AND H IS IDENTITY BUT HIS GIVING THE GIFT TO THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF PAY ORDER HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED AT ALL. THIS PART OF THE TRANSACTION HAS NOT BEEN P ROVED. AT OUR INSTANCE THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE CERTIFICATE IN ARABIC LA NGUAGE WAS PLACED ON RECORD. WE ARE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND ON WHAT BASIS T HE SAID DOCUMENT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CIT(A) AND CAME TO A CONCLUSIO N THAT THE SAID PERSON WAS RUNNING A BUSINESS IN DUBAI AND GOES ON GIVING VARIOUS PRESUMPTIONS ABOUT DUBAI AND ITS COMMERCIAL SHOPS AND ESTABLISHM ENTS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PERSON DOING BUSINESS THERE JUST BECAUSE THERE WAS A BUSINESS IN DUBAI. THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION NOW PL ACED ON RECORD INDICATES THAT SRI A K SAJNANI WAS MANAGER OF THE ABOVE BUSIN ESS. THE CERTIFICATE DOES NOT ESTABLISH CREDIT WORTHINESS AT ALL. EVEN WITH R EFERENCE TO THE RELATIONSHIP, WHICH THE A.O. ENQUIRED IN THE BEGINN ING OF THE ENQUIRY PROCEEDS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBMITTED ANYTHING B EFORE THE A.O. AND BEFORE THE CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED AS UNDER: - THE APPELLANT HAD INVITED MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI ON THE OCCASION OF HIS BROTHERS WEDDING IN FEBRUARY, 1994. HE CAME AN D STAYED WITH THE APPELLANT DURING THOSE DAYS. IN ORDER TO APPRECIATE THE TRUE NATURE OF GIFT RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT FROM MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJN ANI, THE FOLLOWING CLARIFICATION IS OFFERED. APPELLANT HIMSELF COMES F ROM AFFLUENT FAMILY. HIS INCOME DURING THE CURRENT YEAR ITSELF IS MORE THAN 70 LAKHS. MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI IS OF SAME SOCIAL STRATA & IS A CLOSE FAMILY FRIEND OF APPELLANT. WHEN THE WEDDING OF APPELLANTS BROTHER SUNIL DATWANIS MARRIAGE WAS CELEBRATED IN FEBRUARY 1994 NATURALLY MR. ASHOK KUMAR ITA NO. 2280/MUM/2009 SHRI ISHU VASUDEV DATWANI 6 SAJNANI WAS SPECIFICALLY INVITED. HE TOOK THE TROUB LE OF COMING ALL THE WAY FROM DUBAI FOR THIS OCCASION AND BEING MORE OF A FAMILY MEMBER THAN A FRIEND STAYED WITH THE APPELLANT. WE HAVE WITH US VISUAL EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF PHOT OGRAPHS TAKEN ON THE OCCASION OF THE SAID WEDDING TO SHOW THE CLOSE RELA TION THAT EXISTS BETWEEN THE DONEE AND THE DONOR. THE WAY MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI PARTICIPATED IN MANY FUNCTIONS DURING THE WEDDING W ILL PROVE THE ABIDING FRIENDSHIP WITH THE APPELLANTS FAMILY. IN THESE DA YS EVEN CLOSE RELATIONS DO NOT VISIT FROM SUCH A FAR OFF PLACE TO ATTEND TH E WEDDINGS. HERE IS THE CASE IN WHICH MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI CAME ALL THE WAY FROM DUBAI, STAYED WITH THE APPELLANT, TOOK ACTIVE PART IN ALL THE FUNCTIONS. IT CLEARLY SHOWS THE NATURAL LOVE AND AFFECTION BETWEEN THE AP PELLANT AND MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI. HIS STATUS PROVES BEYOND DOUBT THAT HE WAS CAPABLE TO GIVING A GIFT OF RS.20,00,000/-. THIS AMOUNT IS NOT A VERY BIG SUM F OR HIM. HIS RELATIONS SHIP FOR THE SEVERAL YEARS SHOWS THAT HE IS VERY CL OSE TO ALL THE FAMILY MEMBERS. CONSIDERING ALL THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE IT CAN EASILY BE CONCLUDED THAT THIS IS GENUINE GIFT FROM MR. ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI TO MR. ISHU DATWANI. 7. THE LOVE AND AFFECTION ASPECT HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO DISCUSSION BY THE ASSESSEE WHILE EXPLAINING BEFORE THE CIT(A) VIDE LE TTER DATED 20 TH SEPTEMBER 2008. HOWEVER, IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTIONS MADE I N THE ABOVE LETTER NOTHING WAS PLACED ON RECORD. IN THE ABSENCE OF EST ABLISHING THE IDENTITY OF SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SAJNANI AND HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ASSESSEE AND IN THE ABSENCE OF BASIC GIFT DEED OR DOCUMENT AND ALSO IN THE ABSENCE OF LINKING THE SO CALLED PAY ORDER TO THE SAID PERSONS BANK A CCOUNT OR BOOKS ACCOUNT OR EVEN TO THE BUSINESS OF THE GIVE AND TAKE TRADE ENTERPRISES, IT IS DIFFICULT TO STATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED THE BURDE N IN ESTABLISHING THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE G IFT TRANSACTION. NOT ONLY THE ABOVE, IT IS ALSO ON RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEE I S IN THE HABIT OF RECEIVING GIFTS IN EARLIER YEARS AND ALSO RECEIVED GIFTS IN T HE NAME OF MINOR CHILDREN. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCHARGED THE BURDEN PL ACED IN ESTABLISHING THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE T RANSACTION, WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) WHICH ARE BASE D MORE ON PRESUMPTIONS THAN EVIDENCE. JUST BECAUSE MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS IT DOES NOT ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF T HE TRANSACTION AS HELD BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. P. MOHANKALA 291 ITR 278 (SC). CONSIDERING THE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THA T THE A.O. WAS CORRECT IN TREATING THE AMOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND BRINGING TO TAX UNDER ITA NO. 2280/MUM/2009 SHRI ISHU VASUDEV DATWANI 7 SECTION 68 OF THE IT ACT. FOR THE REASONS STATED A BOVE, WE HAVE NO HESITATION IN REVERSING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORING THE ORDER OF THE A.O. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE ALLOWED. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH NOVEMBER 2010. SD/- SD/- (R.V. EASWAR) (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 24 TH NOVEMBER 2010 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) XIX, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT XIX, MUMBAI CITY 5. THE DR, F BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.