KIRTI R. AJMERA, MUMBAI V. ITO 19(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 245/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1250 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 15-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G M MAKWANA
• Assessee Lawyers: REEPAL TRALSHAWALA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 133(6); 68

Judgement Text

C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO. 245/ MUM/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) SHRI KIRTI R. AJMERA, GOPALDAS DEVELOPERS, 76 KIKA STREET, GULAL WADI, MUMBAI 400004. / V. ITO 19(2)(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020. ./ PAN : AABPA7904L ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI REEPAL TRALSHAWALA REVENUE BY : SHRI G.M. MAKWANA, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 19-04-2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21-04-2017 / O R D E R PER RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL, FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, BEING ITA NO. 245/MUM/2016, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 26 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 32, M UMBAI (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE CIT(A)), FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12, THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ARISING FROM THE ASSESSME NT ORDER DATED 24 TH MARCH, 2014 PASSED BY THE A.O. U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-T AX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE ACT). ITA 245/MUM/2016 2 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN MEMO OF APPEAL FILED WITH THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI (HER EINAFTER CALLED THE TRIBUNAL) READ AS UNDER:- ADDITION OF RS.28,15,500/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSI TED IN BANK ACCOUNT: 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITI ON MADE OF RS.28,15,500/- TOWARDS CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUN T WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD DULY DISCHARGED THE ONUS BY PROVING THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUN TS BY FILING CONFIRMATION LETTERS OF THE PARTIES, WHICH IS NOT DISPU TED AND HENCE, THE ADDITION CONFIRMED OF RS.28,15,500/- IS WITHOUT ANY JU STIFICATION AND LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE TRANSAC TION IS TO BE LOOKED FROM BUSINESSMEN POINT OF VIEW AND ALSO THAT NO FURTHER DOCUMENTS WERE CALLED FOR EITHER BY THE AO OR THE CIT( A) AND HENCE, HAVING ACCEPTED THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS AS GENUINE, THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT GETS EXPLAINED AND THUS, THE ADDITION CONFIRMED OF RS.28,15,500/- IS UNJUSTIFIED AND LIABL E TO BE DELETED. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS AND WITHOUT A CCEPTING, THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT 50% OF C ASH DEPOSITED IN JOINT BANK ACCOUNT AMOUNTING TO RS.9,04,000/- (50% OF TO TAL CASH DEPOSITED IN JOINT BANK ACCOUNT) PERTAINED TO SHRI RAM ESH PANCHAL AND HE HAD ALSO FILED HIS CONFIRMATION BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS CIT(A), WHICH IS ACCEPTED AS GENUINE AND HENCE, ADDITION MA DE TO THIS EXTENT I.E. CASH DEPOSIT AMOUNT OF RS.9,04,000/- IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT IS UNJUSTIFIED AND LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND PARTNER IN AJMERA INVESTMENT CO. ALONG WITH OTHER FAMILY ME MBERS. THE A.O. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) R.W .S. 143(2) OF 1961 ACT BASED ON AIR INFORMATION OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED CASH IN BANK ACCOUNTS WITH NEW INDIA CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMI TED AMOUNTING TO RS. 28,15,500/- DURING PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE IM PUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED BY THE AO TO SUBMIT CASH FLO W STATEMENT AND ON VERIFICATION OF THE SAME, THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED CASH IN TWO SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT WITH NEW INDIA CO- OPERATIVE BANK LTD. ( ITA 245/MUM/2016 3 SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO. 19259 AND 21227) TO THE TUN E OF RS. 28,15,500/- AND THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT THE CASH WAS DEPOS ITED AS THEIR SHARE OF INVESTMENT. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED BY THE AO TO EXP LAIN THE SOURCE OF THE SAID CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT FOR WHICH NO EXP LANATIONS WERE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE A.O. ACCORDINGLY ISSUED NOTIC E U/S 133(6) OF THE ACT TO THE BANK AND OBTAINED THE BANK STATEMENTS OF THE TW O BANK ACCOUNTS DIRECTLY. ON VERIFICATION OF THE SAID BANK STATEME NTS, THE A.O. DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 28,15,500/- WHICH COULD NOT BE VERIFIED AND HENCE THE AO ADDED THE SAME TO THE TO TAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT, VIDE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24- 03-2014 PASSED BY THE AO U/S 143(3) OF 1961 ACT. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24-03-20 14 PASSED BY THE A.O. U/S 143(3) OF 1961 ACT, THE ASSESSEE FILED FIRST AP PEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE MADE THE FOLLOWING SUBMISSIONS BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A):- THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER , THE A.O. HAS OBSERVED THAT AS PER AIR INFORMATION RECEIVED, THE APPELLANT HAD MADE CASH DEPOSITS IN 2 BANK ACCOUNTS WITH NEW INDIA CO- OPERATIVE BANK LTD., I.E. SAVING BANK A/C NO. 19259 (CASH DEPOSITED RS. 10,07,500/-) AND A/C NO. 21227 {CAS H DEPOSITED OF RS.18,08,000/-] AND THUS, THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT O F CASH DEPOSITED AMOUNTED TO RS.28,15,500/-. IT IS PERTINE NT TO NOTE HERE THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT NO. 19259 IS IN THE INDI VIDUAL NAME OF APPELLANT WHEREAS BANK ACCOUNT NO.21227 IS JOINT ACCOUNT OF APPELLANT AND HIS PARTNER SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS, EXPLANATION WAS CALLED FOR IN RESPECT OF THE CASH DEPOSIT MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME, THE APPELLANT FILED DETAILED EXPLANATION VIDE LETTE R DATED 21.03.2014 ALONG WITH CONFIRMATION LETTERS OF PARTI ES WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND THEREBY EXPLAINED THE SOUR CE OF CASH DEPOSIT. HOWEVER, IN CONTRAST TO THE SAID FACTUAL P OSITION, THE AO HAS OBSERVED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT NO EXPLAN ATION ABOUT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT IS SUBMITTED AND ON THIS INCORRECT ITA 245/MUM/2016 4 ASSUMPTION, THE AO MADE ADDITION OF THE ENTIRE AMOU NT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN BOTH THE BANK ACCOUNTS AGGREGATING TO RS.28,15,500/-. THUS, THE ADDITION IS MADE WITHOUT TAKING ANY COGNIZANCE OF THE DETAILS SUBMITTED AND EXPLANATION GIVEN ABOUT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IN THE LETTER FILED DATE D 21.03.2014, IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE AO THAT DURING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE APPELLANT HAS ENTERED INTO TRA NSACTION FOR SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND SITUATED AT THANE TO FOLL OWING PARTIES AND FROM WHOM ADVANCE WAS RECEIVED IN CASH AS UNDER :- SR NO. NAME OF PARTY ADVANCE RECD. PAN 1 SHRI SALIM AHMED MANSURI 7,00,000/- AFOPM2738L 2 SHRI HABIB AHMED MANSURI 6,20,000/- ASFPM2127B 3 SMT. GULABBEN AHMED MANSURI 7,00,000/- 4 SHRI MULCHANDAS RANCHHODDAS PATEL 6,25,000/- BPPPP5222J THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT ALONGWITH THE LETTER DAT ED 21.03.2014, THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM THE ABOVE 4 PARTIES ALONG WITH THEIR 7/12 ABSTRACTS WERE SUBMITTED IN O RDER TO PROVE THE TRANSACTION AND RECEIPT OF CASH. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT OUT OF THE CASH RECEIVED FROM ABOVE PARTIES, CASH W AS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. THE APPELLANT FURTHER SUBMITTED TO THE AO THAT THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO. 21227 WITH NEW INDIA CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, GIRGUAM BRANCH WAS IN JOINT NAMES OF THE APPELLANT AND HIS PARTNER SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL HAVING EQUAL SHARE. IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT, THE TOTAL CASH DEPOSITED AGGREGATED TO RS. RS.18,08,000/- AND BEING EQUAL PARTNERS, CASH OF RS .9,04,000/- WAS DEPOSITED BY SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL OUT OF HIS OWN SOURCES AND CASH OF RS.9,04,000/- WAS DEPOSITED BY THE APPE LLANT FROM THE SOURCE OF CASH RECEIVED FROM THE AFORESAID 4 PA RTIES. IN THIS CONNECTION, THE APPELLANT FILED CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL CONFIRMING THAT THE CASH DEPOSITED I N BANK ACCOUNT NO.21227 OF AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF RS.18,08,00 0/- WAS ITA 245/MUM/2016 5 JOINTLY DEPOSITED AND HE DEPOSITED CASH OF RS.9,04, 000/- OUT OF HIS OWN SOURCES. THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT SINCE H IS NAME APPEARS AS FIRST NAME IN THE BANK ACCOUNT NO.21227, THE AIR INFORMATION SHOW ENTIRE CASH DEPOSITED IN THIS ACCO UNT IN THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT ONLY. HOWEVER AS SUBMITTED, T HE CASH OF RS.9,04,000/- WAS CONTRIBUTED AND DEPOSITED BY PART NER OF APPELLANT SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL. THE APPELLANT THUS SUBMITS THAT BEFORE THE AO ENTIR E EXPLANATION AND DETAILS WERE FURNISHED IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOS ITED IN BANK ACCOUNTS, HOWEVER, THE AO HAS COMPLETELY FAILED TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE EXPLANATION AND DETAILS SUBMITTED BEFORE HIM (PERHAPS DUE TO TIME BARRING PRESSURE). THE APPELLA NT SUBMITS THAT SINCE THE EXPLANATION IS DULY FURNISHED IN RES PECT OF THE ENTIRE CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNTS, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS WITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION AND LIABLE TO BE DE LETED. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE AND WITHOUT ADMITTIN G, THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT IN ANY EVENTUALITY, THE CASH DEPOSITED OF RS.9,04,000/- BY PARTNER SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL IN THE BANK ACCOUNT NO.21227 WITH NEW INDIA CO-OPERATIVE BANK L TD., GIRGUAM BR., OUGHT TO BE ACCEPTED AS THE ACCOUNT IS IN THE JOINT NAME OF THE APPELLANT AND SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL AND T HAT THE SAME IS DULY CONFIRMED BY SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL THAT HE HAD CONTRIBUTED AND DEPOSITED CASH OF RS.9,04,000/- I.E . 50%. HENCE, THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE ENTIRE CASH DEPOSITE D ADDED IN HANDS OF THE APPELLANT IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND LIABLE TO BE DELETED. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT CASH OF RS 10,07,500/- WAS DEPOSITED IN SB A/C NO 19259 WHICH IS OPERATED AS A SINGLE HOLDER BY TH E ASSESSEE HIMSELF, AND CASH OF RS 18,08,000/- IS DEPOSITED IN SB A/C NO 21 227 OPERATED JOINTLY BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH ONE MR. RAMESH PANCHAL WHO IS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO BE HIS PARTNER. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED C ONFIRMATION FROM SAID MR. RAMESH PANCHAL BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE ALSO CLAIMED THAT HE HAD SOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND TO 4 PARTIES VIZ. SHRI S ALIM AHMED MANSURI, SH. HABIB AHMED MANSURI, SH. GULABBEN AHMED MANSURI & S H. MULCHANDDAS RANCHODDAS PATEL AND RECEIVED CASH OF 7,00,000/-, R S. 6,20,000/-, RS. 7,00,000/- AND RS. 6,25,000/- RESPECTIVELY FOR WHIC H THE CONFIRMATIONS WERE ITA 245/MUM/2016 6 FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE CASH DEPOSITED IN JOINT ACCOUNT IN THE MONTH OF APRIL, 2010 AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,82,000/-. FOR WHICH NO SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT WAS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT INTO THE JOINT BANK ACCOUNT BEARING NU MBER SB A/C NO 21227 IN APRIL 2010 REMAINS UNEXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE, WAS THE OBSERVATION OF LEARNED CIT(A). THE LEARNED CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT NO EVIDENCE TOWARDS PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND AND SALE OF THE SAID LAND TO FOUR PARTIES HAD BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RECEIPT OF ALLEGED SALE CONSIDERATION PRE DATES THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF PURCHASE CONSIDERATION WHIC H IS NOT NORMAL , WAS THE OBSERVATION OF LEARNED CIT(A). IT WAS ALSO OBSERVED BY LEARNED CIT(A) THAT IT IS UNUSUAL THAT SALE OF LAND IS MADE IN CASH WHILE PUR CHASE OF THE SAME LAND IS MADE BY CHEQUE. THE LD. CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY HELD THA T THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN TWO BANK AC COUNTS IN HIS AND AS SUCH THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A. O. TO THE TUNE OF RS. 28,15,500/-, VIDE APPELLATE ORDERS DATED 26-11-2015 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A). 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 26-11-20 15 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE TWO B ANK ACCOUNTS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) FOR WHICH EVIDENCES WERE DULY SUBMITTED BUT THE SAME WERE NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED BY LEARNED CIT(A). IT IS SUBM ITTED BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT PAPER BOOK HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL CONTAINING THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES IN CONNE CTION AND IN CONTEXT OF CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNTS . HE INVITED OUR ATT ENTION TO PAPER BOOK / PAGE 19 WHEREBY THE CONFIRMATION FROM SHRI RAMESH P ANCHAL HAS BEEN PLACED W.R.T. DEPOSIT OF HIS SHARE OF CASH OF RS. 9,04,000 /- IN BANK ACCOUNT WHICH WAS OPERATED JOINTLY BY THE ASSESSEE WITH MR RAMESH PANCHAL BEARING ITA 245/MUM/2016 7 NUMBER SB A/C NO 21227 . IN THE CONFIRMATION LETT ER SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL STATED THAT HE HAS A JOINT ACCOUNT WITH MR. KIRTI R ASIKLAL AJMERA (ASSESSEE) IN NEW INDIA CO.OP. BANK LIMITED, GIRGAUM BRANCH,MUMBA I AND JOINTLY DEPOSITED CASH AMOUNT OF RS. 18,08,000/-, OUT OF WH ICH HIS SHARE WAS RS. 9,04,000/-. THUS, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT OUT OF TOTA L CASH DEPOSITED OF RS. 28,15,500/- IN THE TWO BANK ACCOUNTS, THE SAID MR R AMESH PANCHAL OWNED UP RS. 9,04,000/- AND NO ADDITION IS WARRANTED OF T HIS AMOUNT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND TO FOUR PARTIES AGAINST WHICH ADVANCES HAD BEEN REC EIVED IN CASH AGAINST WHICH CONFIRMATIONS WERE FILED FROM THE PARTIES TO WHOM THE SAID AGRICULTURAL LAND WERE SOLD VIDE PAPER BOOK PAGE 4 TO 17 FILED B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAD SOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND TO 4 PARTIES VIZ. SHRI SALIM AHME D MANSURI, SH. HABIB AHMED MANSURI, SH. GULABBEN AHMED MANSURI & SH. MUL CHANDDAS RANCHODDAS PATEL AND RECEIVED CASH OF 7,00,000/-, R S. 6,20,000/-, RS. 7,00,000/- AND RS. 6,25,000/- RESPECTIVELY FOR WHIC H THE CONFIRMATIONS WERE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT T HUS THE ENTIRE CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK STOOD EXPLAINED AND NO ADDITION IS WARRANTE D IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL CONTENDED THAT THESE INFO RMATION CAN BE EXAMINED AND VERIFIED BY THE A.O. AS THESE DOCUMENTS WERE NO T PRODUCED BEFORE THE A.O. BUT WERE FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) DURIN G THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED THESE EVIDENCES . THUS, IN NUTSHELL, THE LD. COUNSEL REQU ESTED THE MATTER MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. WHEREIN THE AO CAN MA KE NECESSARY ENQUIRIES, EXAMINATION AND VERIFICATIONS OF THESE EVIDENCES BE FORE ARRIVING AT THE DECISION. 7. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTED THE O RDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. ITA 245/MUM/2016 8 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE OBSERVED THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND IS PARTNER IN A PARTNERSHIP FIRM NAMELY AJMERA INVE STMENT CO. ALONG WITH OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS. THERE WAS A CASH DEPOSIT OF R S. 28,15,500/- IN THE TWO SAVING BANK ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE IN NEW INDIA C O.OP. BANK , WHEREIN ONE BANK ACCOUNT IS JOINTLY HELD BY ASSESSEE WITH ONE SHRI RAMESH PANCHAL(SB 21227). THE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 10,07,500/- WAS MAD E IN THE INDIVIDUAL SAVING BANK ACCOUNT(SB 19259) AND CASH DEPOSIT OF R S. 18,08,000/- WAS MADE IN THE JOINT SAVING BANK ACCOUNT (SB 21227)WHI CH WAS HELD JOINTLY WITH MR RAMESH PANCHAL. THE SAID MR RAMESH PANCHAL OWNED UP 50% OF CASH DEPOSITED IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT NO 21227 OPERATED JOINTLY BY SAID MR RAMESH PANCHAL AND THE ASSESSEE. THE SAID MR RAMESH PANCHAL HAS ISSUED CONFIRMATION WHEREIN HE CONFIRMED TO HAVE DEPOSITED RS. 9,04,000/- IN THE SAID SAVING BANK ACCOUNT. THESE EVIDENCES AND CONTE NTIONS NEED VERIFICATION AND EXAMINATION BY THE AO WHICH MAY ENTAIL ENQUIRY BY THE AO. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO CLAIMED TO HAVE RECEIVED ADVANCE CONSIDERA TION AGAINST THE SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR WHICH CONFIRMATIONS HAVE BEEN FILED FROM THE PURCHASING PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED TO HAVE SOLD AGRI CULTURAL LAND TO 4 PARTIES VIZ. SHRI SALIM AHMED MANSURI, SH. HABIB AHMED MANS URI, SH. GULABBEN AHMED MANSURI & SH. MULCHANDDAS RANCHODDAS PATEL AN D RECEIVED CASH OF 7,00,000/-, RS. 6,20,000/-, RS. 7,00,000/- AND RS. 6,25,000/- RESPECTIVELY FOR WHICH THE CONFIRMATIONS WERE FURNISHED BY THE A SSESSEE. THESE EVIDENCES WERE FILED BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) WHO DOUBTED THE SA ME ON THE GROUNDS THAT PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURE LAND WAS MADE IN CHEQUE WHI LE SALE IS MADE IN CASH. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO EXPRESSED RESERVATION ON TH E SALE BEING MADE EARLIER THAN PURCHASE OF THE SAID LAND. THE SALE AND PURCHA SE DEED FOR THE SAID AGRICULTURE LAND WAS NOT FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED C IT(A) , WHICH ASSESSEE NOW CLAIMS TO BE AVAILABLE FOR NECESSARY VERIFICATIONS AND EXAMINATION AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE AO. THESE EXPLANATIONS AND DOCUMENT S SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE NEEDS VERIFICATION BY THE A.O. AND AS SUCH , IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW ITA 245/MUM/2016 9 KEEPING IN VIEW FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE INCLINED TO SET ASIDE AND RESTORE T HIS MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DE-NOVO DETERMINATION OF THE ISSUES ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY THE AO AFTER CONDUCTING SUCH EXAMINATION, EN QUIRY AND VERIFICATIONS AS THE AO MAY DEEM FIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW IN S ET ASIDE REMAND PROCEEDINGS . THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO PRODUCE A LL NECESSARY AND RELEVANT EVIDENCES BEFORE THE A.O. TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM , WHICH EVIDENCES AND EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WILL BE ADMITTED BY THE AO IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT PROPER AND ADEQUATE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE A.O. TO THE ASSESSEE IN AC CORDANCE WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LA W. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 9. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 245/MUM/2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST APRIL, 2017. # $% &' 21-04-2017 ( ) SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (RAMIT KOCHAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ MUMBAI ; & DATED 21-04-2017 [ .9../ R.K. R.K. R.K. R.K. , EX. SR. PS ITA 245/MUM/2016 10 !'#$%&%# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. : ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED, MUMBAI 4. : / CIT- CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5. =>( 99?@ , ?@ , $ / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI C BENCH 6. (BC D / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, = 9 //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , $ / ITAT, MUMBAI