CHETAN RAVI BATRA, MUMBAI V. ITO 20(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2757/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87966 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 01-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEIL PHILIPS
• Assessee Lawyers: N M PORWAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HONBLE S/SHRI H.L. KARWA, PRESIDENT AND B. R.BASKARAN (AM) . . , . . , ./ I.T.A. NO.2757/MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2006-07) CHETAN RAVI BATRA B-607, BLUE BELL APARTMENT, NEAR BASANT CINEMA, CHEMBUR (E), MUMBAI . / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 20(1)(2), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, PAREL, MUMBAI-400012 ( / APPELLANT) .. ( ! / RESPONDENT) ./ #$ ./ PAN/GIRNO.:AFAPB3852N % / APPELLANT BY : SHRI N M PORWAL ! & % / RESPONDENT BY SHRI NEIL PHILIPS ' ( & ) * / DATE OF HEARING : 1.1.2015 +, & ) * /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.01.2015 / O R D E R PER B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER DATED 16.2.2012 PASSED BY LD CIT(A)-32, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO THE ACT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF THE FOLLOWING FOUR ISSUES : A) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE O F RS.2,52,384/-; B) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT O F RS.180,100/-; C) ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITU RE OF RS.15,361/-; AND D) DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST PAID ON HOUSING LOAN A MOUNTING TO RS.94,367/-. ITA NO 2757/MUM/2012 2 3. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,15,9 67/-. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CO-OPERATE WITH THE AO AND HENCE, THE AO COMPLE TED THE ASSESSMENT TO THE BEST OF HIS JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 144 OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) BY MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) WAS PARTLY ALLOWED. STILL AGG RIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED THAT UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE IS RELATING TO CREDIT CARD PAYMENT AND THEY WERE PAID THROUGH BANK ACCOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, HE SUBMITT ED THAT SOURCE OF PAYMENT ARE EXPLAINED AND HENCE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION. WITH REGARD TO THE DEPOSI T MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH WAS ADDED AS UNEXPLAINED CASH, THE L D. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAVING OPENING BALANCE OF RS.2,63,726/ - BESIDES THE PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS OF RS.4,28,000/- DECLARED DUR ING THE YEAR. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS UTILIZED THESE FUND S FOR MAKING DEPOSITS INTO THE BANK. WITH REGARD TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF OUT OF EXPENDITURES, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED AGG REGATE EXPENDITURE OF RS.76,807/- ONLY AGAINST THE PROFESSIONAL RECEIPT O F RS.4,28,000/- AND HENCE THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISALLOWING THE 2 0% OF THE EXPENSES. WITH REGARD TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST PAID ON SELF OCCUPIED PROPERTY, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS DISALLOWED THE SAME ONLY FOR WANT OF PROOF. ACCORDINGLY, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT( A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WITH REGARD TO THE ADDITION RELATING TO UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE, U NEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND INTEREST ON HOUSING LOAN, WE ARE OF THE VIEW TH AT THE SAME REQUIRES ITA NO 2757/MUM/2012 3 VERIFICATION AT THE END OF THE AO, SINCE THE ASSESS EE IS RAISING THE NEW CONTENTIONS WHICH WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE AO. TH OUGH THESE CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED BEFORE LD CIT(A), YET THE A SSESSEE IS PLEADING THAT SOME MORE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PLACED BEFORE THE AO. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE S AID ISSUES, AND RESTORE THEM TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO EXAM INE THEM AFRESH BY DULY CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AN D INFORMATION FURNISHED AND TAKE PROPER DECISION IN ACCORDANCE W ITH LAW. 6 WITH REGARD TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE OU T OF CONVEYANCE, TELEPHONE, VEHICLE, MISCELLANEOUS AND PROFESSIONAL FEES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE AT 20% OF THE TOTAL EXPE NDITURE IS ON HIGHER SIDE. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW, IT WOULD ME ET ENDS OF JUSTICE, IF THE DISALLOWANCE IS RESTRICTED TO 10%. WE DIRECT THE A O ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ABOVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16TH JAN,2015. +, ' - ./ 0 1 16TH JAN 2015 , & 2( 3 SD SD ( . . / H.L. KARWA) ( . . , / B.R. BASKARAN ) / PRESIDENT / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . ' ( MUMBAI: 16TH JAN, 2015. . . ./ SRL , SR. PS ITA NO 2757/MUM/2012 4 ! ' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. ! / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ' 7) ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 4. ' 7) / CIT CONCERNED 5. 6. 89 2 ): , * : , . ' ( / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 2 ; < ( / GUARD FILE. = ' / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY > # (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) * : , . ' ( /ITAT, MUMBAI