ITO 32(2)(3), MUMBAI V. MITESH K JAIN, MUMBAI

ITA 2292/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2733 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K KARDA M
• Assessee Lawyers: NITESH K JAIN
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2292 /MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) INCOME TAX OFFICER-32(2)(3), ROOM NO.305-B, 3 RD FLOOR, C-13, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA(E), MUMBAI 400 051. ... APPELLA NT VS. SHRI MITESH K. JAIN, A-72, ASHIANA TOWERS, SODAWALA LANE, BORIWALI (W), MUMBAI 400 012 PAN: ADDPJ 8448B .... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.K.KARDAM RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NITESH K. JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 12/07/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12/07/2016 ORDER THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE PERTAININ G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORDE R PASSED BY CIT(A)- 44, MUMBAI DATED 23/01/2015, WHICH IN TURN ARISES O UT OF AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 144 R .W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 26 /03/2013. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWIN G GROUNDS OF APPEAL. (I) 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN CONSIDERING 3% OF THE DEPOSITS A GAINST 20% 2 ITA NO. 2292 /MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ESTIMATED BY THE A.O. AS FAIR INCOME OF THE ASSESSE E IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL EVIDENCE ON RECORD.' (II) 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN ARRIVING AT CASH DEPOSITS OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.49, 75,300/- INSTEAD OF RS .1,35,86,6841 -.' (III) 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ONLY ONE BANK ACCOUNT INSTEAD OF TWO BANK ACCOUNTS HELD BY THE ASSESSEE F OR CONSIDERATION.' (IV) 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT TH AT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COOPERATE WITH THE DEPARTMENT IN CONNECTION WIT H ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE PRECEDING YEARS AND CURRENT ASS ESSMENT YEAR AND MODUS OPERANDI OF HIS BUSINESS ACTIVITIES IS UN KNOWN.' (V) 'THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE A.O. BE RESTOR ED.' (VI) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR ALTER A NY GROUND OR ADD A NEW GROUND.' 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE APPELLANT FURNISHED A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.2168/MUM/2015 DATE D 01/07/2016, WHEREBY FOR THE INSTANT ASSESSMENT YEAR THE IMPUGNE D ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26/03/2013 HAS BEEN QUASHED ON THE GRO UND OF INVALIDITY OF THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UNDER SECTION 147 OF T HE ACT. AS A CONSEQUENCE, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED, AS INFRUCTUOUS. THE ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AT THE TIME OF HEARI NG ON 12/07/2016. SD/- (G.S. PANNU) ACCOU NTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 12/07/2016 VM , SR. PS 3 ITA NO. 2292 /MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) 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