HEMA MEHUL MEHTA, MUMBAI V. ITO 16(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3061/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2751 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 18-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 22-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 69C; 80C; 144

Judgement Text

HEMA MEHUL MEHTA ITA NO. 3061 /MUM/20 1 3 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH H, MUMBAI , , BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR , ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER ITA NO. : 3 0 61 /MUM/20 1 3 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 1 0 ) HEMA MEHUL MEHTA , 30, 3 RD FLOOR, 21, D S KAPOL NIWAS, (SANGHVI SADAN), 4 TH KHETWADI LANE, S V P ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 004 .: PAN: A HFPM 9728 B VS INCOME TAX OFFICER - 16(3)(1), 2 ND FLOO R, MATRU MANDIR, TARDEO, MUMBAI - 400 034 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIJAY SHANKAR /DATE OF HEARING : 18 - 08 - 201 5 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 - 11 - 201 5 ORDER , . . : PER AMIT SHUKLA, J M : THE AFORESAID APPEAL HA S BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20 .0 3 .201 3 PASSED BY CIT(A) - 27, MUMBAI FOR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PA SSED U/S 14 4 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 1 0. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS I N ITS GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - 1) THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 41,63,000/ - . 2) IN A DDITION TO THE AFORESAID GROUND OF APPEAL, THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,29,450/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CREDIT CAR PAYMENT U/S 69C OF I.T. ACT, 1961. 3) THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 32,849/ - ON ACCOUNT OF LIC PAYMENT U/S 80C AND RS. 15,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF MEDI CLAIM PAYMENT U/S 80D OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. HEMA MEHUL MEHTA ITA NO. 3061 /MUM/20 1 3 2 2 . AFTER VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS FILED. EVEN RPAD LETTER SENT WAS RETURNED BACK. THUS, APPEAL WAS HEARD ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD. FROM THE RECORDS, IT IS SEEN THAT EVEN DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS DESPITE S ERVICE OF NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PUT UP ANY APPEARANCE AND ACCORDINGLY ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 ON THE BASIS OF AIR INFORMATION RECEIVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED RS. 41,63,000/ - IN THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT AND HAS MADE PAYMENTS AGAINST CRED IT CARDS BILLS FOR WHICH NO PROPER EXPLANATION HAD BEEN GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE . A CCORDINGLY, THE SUMS AGGREGATING RS. 4,29,450/ - WAS ADDED U/S 69C. BESIDES THIS, THE ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80C OF RS. 32,849/ - & 80D OF RS. 49,000/ - WAS ALSO DISAL LOWED. 3. EVEN BEFORE THE CIT(A), THOUGH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE WAS APPOINTED, HOWEVER, HE ALSO ADMITTED THAT DUE TO NON - COOPERATION BY THE ASSESSEE, THE REQUISITE DETAILS COULD NOT BE FURNISHED DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AO. THE LD. CIT( A) . AFTER CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT AND OTHER MATERIAL ON RECORD CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS AFTER OBSERVING AND HOLDING AS UNDER : - 4. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE CONTENTS OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE RESULT OF THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. AT THE OUTSET , I NOTE THAT APPELLANT IS HABITUATED TO NON CO OPERATION AND NON COMPLYING WITH THE STATUTORY NOTICES ISSUED TO HER. AT THE FIRST INSTANCE, THE APPELLANT FAILED TO FURNISH ANY DETAILS BEFORE THE A.O. THUS RESULTING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ULS.144 OF THE A CT. EVEN DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE ME, THE CASE WAS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 6 DIFFERENT OCC ASIONS FROM 23.08.2012 TO 28.01 .2013 AND THE APPELLANT WAS LEAST BOTHERED TO RESPOND TO ANY OF THESE NOTICES OF HEARING. IT WAS ONLY IN RESPONSE TO THIS OFFICE LET TER DATED 18.12.2012 THAT NO FURTHER OPPORTUNITY SHALL BE GRANTED AND THE APPEAL WILL BE DECIDED BASED ON MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD THAT THE APPELLANT CHOSE TO RESPOND FINALLY ON 28.01.2013 REQUESTING FOR REMANDING OF THE CASE BACK TO THE AO. NOW, EVE N AFTER REMANDING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO AND DESPITE PROPER OPPORTUNITY HEMA MEHUL MEHTA ITA NO. 3061 /MUM/20 1 3 3 HAVING BEEN GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT, THERE IS A TOTAL NON CO - OPERATION ON HER PART IN NOT RESPONDING TO THE NOTICES. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL IS DECIDED BASED ON THE FACTS NOTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. I NOTE THAT APPELLANT HAS MADE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 41,63,000/ - IN HER BANK ACCOUNT WHICH WERE NOT EXPLAINED BY HER AS TO THEIR SOURCE AS REQUIRED U/S.68 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE SAME ARE TO BE ASSESSED AS UNE XPLAINED CASH CREDITS. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. IS HEREBY UPHELD. 6. AS REGARDS THE CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS OF RS. 4,29,450/ - ALSO, THE APPELLANT HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY DETAILS AS TO THE SOURCE OF SUCH EXPENDITURE. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSEN CE OF ANY EXPLANATION, THE IMPUGNED EXPENDITURE IS TO BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S.69C OF THE ACT AND THE ADDITION IS UPHELD. SIMILARLY, FOR WANT OF EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF RECEIPTS, THE DEDUCTION U/S.80C OF RS. 32,849/ - AND U/S.800 OF RS. 15, 000/ - DISALLOWED BY THE A.O. IS ALSO UPHELD. THUS, ALL THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. ARE UPHELD ON MERITS. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE DR AND ALSO FINDING GIVEN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO REBUT THE FINDINGS OF THE AO AND ALSO THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND THE SOURCE OF EXPENDITURE INCURRED . I N ABSENCE OF ANY SUCH EXPLANATION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO DEVIATE FROM THE FINDINGS AS RECORDED BY THE CIT(A) , ACCORDINGLY S AME ARE CONFIRMED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 TH NOVEMBER , 2015. SD/ - SD/ - ( ) ( ) (RAMIT KOCHAR ) ( AMIT SHUKLA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 10 TH NOVEMBER , 2015 HEMA MEHUL MEHTA ITA NO. 3061 /MUM/20 1 3 4 / COPY TO: - 1 ) / THE APPELLANT. 2 ) / THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A) - 27 , MUMBAI. 4 ) THE CIT 16 , MUMBAI. 5 ) H , , / THE D.R. H BENCH, M UMBAI. 6 ) \ COPY TO GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / / , DY. / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI * . . *CHAVAN, SR.PS