RAVINDRA BISHT SINGH, MUMBAI V. ITO 21(1)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 2812/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3470 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH D MUM BAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.2812/M/2014 FOR AY-2009-10 SHRI RAVINDRA BISHT SINGH, FLAT NO. 5, 1 ST FLOOR, KHRISHNA COTTAGE, HANUMAN ROAD, VILE PARLE (EAST), MUMBAI-400057. PAN- BATPS8565A VS. ITO-21(1)(4) ROOM NO. 609, 6 TH FLOOR, PRATYAKSHA KAR BHAVAN, BKC, BANDRA(E), MUMBAI-400051. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE REPENTED BY : SHRI PARESH S HAH (AR) REVENUE REPRESEN TED BY : SHRI B.S. BIST (DR) D ATE OF HEARING: 25/07/2016 DATE OF PRONOUN CEMENT: 26/08/2016 ORDER PER PAWAN SINGH 1. THE PRESENT APPEAL IS FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-22, MUMBAI DATED 10.02.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2009-10. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN IGNORING MATERIAL AVAILA BLE WITH HIM. THE LD. AO HAS ERRED IN TREATING DEPOSITS IN BANK AS UNEXPL AINED CASH CREDIT IGNORING THE UTILIZATION THEREOF, AUDIT REPORT, BOO KS OF ACCOUNTS AND SUBMISSIONS FILED. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN TREATING RECEIPTS AS INC OME IN FORM OF PROFESSIONAL FEES. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER VAR Y AND / OR WITHDRAW ANY OR ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 4. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ADDITION MADE TO INCOM E AS: (A) UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT TO THE TUNE OF RS. 24,33,50 0/- BE DELETED AND (B) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO THE TUNE OF RS. 26,000 /- BE DELETED. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE F ILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR RELEVANT AY ON 22/09/2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 12,63,645/-. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, 2 ITA NO. 2812/M/14- SHRI RAVINDRA BISHT SINGH THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE D EPOSITED A CASH OF RS. 24,33,500/- IN COSMOS BANK, THE ASSESSEE ASKED TO E XPLAIN THE CASH DEPOSIT. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT CASH PAYMENTS IN THE BA NK IS RS.27,25,112/ AND NOT RS.24,33,500/-. THE SAID PAYMENTS ARE MADE FOR THE DRAFT PAY & ACCOUNTS OFFICER OF MINISTRY OF I & B FILMS DIVISION, MUMBAI . THE SAID PAYMENTS WAS MADE ON BEHALF OF FILM PRODUCERS TO THE FILM DIVISI ON AS HE IS ENGAGED IN THE PROFESSION OF GETTING CENSOR, SURVEY OF MOTION PICT URES AND DOCUMENTARY. THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 136 TO SOME OF THE PARTIES FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE MADE PAYMENT TO INFORMATION BROADCASTING FILMS DIVISION. THE NOTICES EITHER CAME BACK UN-SERVED WITH THE REMARK OF POSTAL AUTHORITIE S LEFT. THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM YASHRAJ FILMS, VIRGIN RECORDS INDIA PVT LTD AN D RELIANCE BIG ENTERTAINMENT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED, WHEREIN THEY DE NIED HAVING PAID ANYTHING IN CASH TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THE AO CONCLUDED THA T THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT DISCHARGE THE ONUS TO ESTABLISH THE NEXUS OF CASH D EPOSIT BY HIM IN COSMOS BANK AND THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF UNEXPLAINED CAS H CREDIT OF RS. 24,33,500/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, THE ASSE SSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS, HENCE, THIS APPEAL IS FILED BEFORE US. 3. WE HAVE HEARD LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) OF ASSESSEE AND LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) FOR REVENUE AND PE RUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. LD AR OF ASSESSEE ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY BY AO TO PROVE THE CREDIT IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT, AND THE LD CIT(A) NOT APPRECIATED THE SUBMISSION MADE BEFORE H IM AND THE CONFIRMATION OF THE PARTIES. AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER FILED AN APPLICATION FOR ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE CONSISTING OF FINANCIAL STATEME NT OF WIFE OF ASSESSEES COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF ASSESSEES WIFE, AND THE RECON CILIATION STATEMENT AND PRAYED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IS VITAL AND ES SENTIAL FOR CONSIDERATION OF SUBJECT MATTER IN THE APPEAL. LD. DR OF THE REVENUE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IS ADMITTED AND THE MATTER IS R ESTORED TO THE FILE OF AO FOR EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCE FILED, AT THE END OF A O. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTION OF THE PART IES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE SEEN THAT AO CONCLUDED THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT 3 ITA NO. 2812/M/14- SHRI RAVINDRA BISHT SINGH DISCHARGE THE ONUS TO ESTABLISH THE NEXUS, CASH DEP OSIT IN THE COSMOS BANK. DURING THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDING, THE ASSESSEE FILED CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM FIVE PERSONS. LD. CIT(A) CONCLUDED THAT ALL TH ESE CONFIRMATION ARE STEREO TYPE. NO REMAND REPORT FROM AO WAS INVITED BY CIT(A ) ON FILING THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS. THE EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE US WERE NOT FILED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF DOCUME NTARY EVIDENCE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE CASE TO THE FILE OF AO T O EXAMINE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE US AND PASS THE F RESH ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON DAY OF A UGUST, 2016. SD/- SD/- (B.R.BASKARAN) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JU DICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED 26/08/2016 C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: BY ORDER, (ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. E COPY/