MAYTAG UDYOG P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO WD (3)(2)-2, MUMBAI

ITA 2880/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2349 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 25-08-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VIKAS AGARWAL
• Keywords: Gift; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, G BENCH, MUMBAI. BEFORE S/SHRI S.V.MEHROTRA, AM & V.DURGA RAO,JM I.T.A. NO. 2810 /MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 AVINASH PUNAMCHAND MEHTA, V. THE I.T.O. WARD 13(2 ), C/O. SHAH & MEHTA, H-21, APMC MARKET, MUMBAI. PHASE-2, SECTOR-19, VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI. PA NO.AHNPM 6730 H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI VIKAS AGARWAL REVENUE BY : SHRI S.M.KESHKAMAT ORDER PER S.V.MEHROTRA, AM THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 5.2.2009 OF LD CIT (A)-XIII, MUMBAI CONFIRMING THE PENALTY OF RS.4 ,50,000/- U/S. 271(1)(C) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.4,21,450/-. THE ASSES SMENT WAS COMPLETED AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.18,71,590/- AFTER MAKING ADDITION IN RESPECT OF GIFT OF RS.4,80,474/- IN ASSESSEES BALANCE SHEET AND RS.9,65,731/- IN THE BALANCE SHEE T OF MINOR SON MR SAURABH P MEHTA, A NRI BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS, THE AO LEVIED THE PENALTY OF RS.4,50,000/-. LD CIT (A) CONFIRMED THE PENALTY. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE FILED BEFORE US A COPY OF TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 13.2.2009 IN ITA NO.873/M/2004 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 IN QUANTUM APPEAL, WHEREIN, THE TRIBUNAL IN PARAS 5 & 6 OBSERVED AS UNDER:- 2 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SOME CRUCIAL DETAILS WHICH WERE NOT AVAILABLE EITHER BEF ORE THE AO AND CTI (A) ARE NOW AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND IN THIS CONTEXT HE FILED A PAPER BOOK CONTAINING THE CRUCIAL DETAILS BEFORE US. THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THAT THE MATTER BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH CO NSIDERATION IN VIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. LD DR HAS NOT OBJECTED FOR TH E SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. WE, THEREFORE, REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FIL E OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO CONSIDER THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSES SEE AND REDECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A N OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, WE SET ASIDE THE OR DER OF LD CIT (A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO EXAMINE THE IS SUE OF PENALTY IN THE LIGHT OF THE FINDINGS TO BE GIVEN WITH REFERENCE TO THE TRIBUNAL S ORDER DATED 13.2.2009 IN QUANTUM APPEAL (SUPRA) AND AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAN DS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED ON 16 TH APRIL, 2010 SD/- (V. DURGA RAO) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) SD/- (S.V. MEHROTRA) (ACCOUNTANTMEMBER) MUMBAI, DATED 16 TH APRIL, 2010 PARIDA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-, MUMBAI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CITY-, MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH G, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI 3 DATE INITIALS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 13.4.2010 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 15.4.2010 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER AM/JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER AM/J M 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER 4