WHITE PEARL CHEMICAL TRADING & MANUFACTURING P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 13(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 309/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4818 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN KUMAR SINGH
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 147; 68; 143(3); 133(6)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BEFORE HONBLE HONBLE SHRIMANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, A ( M/S. WHITE PEARL CHEMICALS TRADING & MANUFACTURING PVT. LTD. 11/12, KHANDWANI MANSION 3 RD FLOOR, J.P.ROAD ANDHERI (WEST) MUMBAI 400 058 ( APPELLANT ASSESSEE BY REVENUE BY DATE OF HEARING DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT PER MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) 1. AFORESAID APPEAL BY ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR [A Y] 2009-10 CONTEST THE ORDER (APPEALS)- 21, MUMBAI, [ 13(3)(2)/IT-288/2015 - CERTAIN ADDITIONS U/S 68 FOR RS.150 LACS. ASSESSMENT YEAR IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI , HONBLE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM SHRIMANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, A I.T.A. NO.309/MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) WHITE PEARL CHEMICALS TRADING & MANUFACTURING PVT. LTD. 11/12, KHANDWANI MANSION ! ' ! ' ! ' ! ' VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 13(3)(2) AAYKAR BHAWAN M.K.ROAD MUMBAI 400 020 PAN/GIR NO. AAACW-6300-L APPELLANT ) : ( #$ RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : CH. ARUN KUMAR SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 05/02/2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14/02/2019 O R D E R MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AFORESAID APPEAL BY ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR [A Y] THE ORDER OF LD. C OMMISSIONER OF 21, MUMBAI, [ CIT(A)], APPEAL NO. CIT(A) - 16 DATED 01/10/2016 QUA CONFIRMATION OF CERTAIN ADDITIONS U/S 68 FOR RS.150 LACS. ITA NO.309/MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR - 2009-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JM AND SHRIMANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, A M OFFICER - WARD AAYKAR BHAWAN 400 020 RESPONDENT ) CH. ARUN KUMAR SINGH - LD.DR AFORESAID APPEAL BY ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR [A Y] OMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIT(A) -21/ITO- CONFIRMATION OF 2. NONE HAS APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE. THE PERUSAL OF ORDER SHEET ENTRIES THE HEARING / PROCEEDINGS ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION . LEFT WITH OPTION, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND AFTER HEARING LD. DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE, WHO RELIED UPO 3. FROM PERUSAL OF RECORDS, IT TRANSPIRES THAT THE ASSESSED FOR IMPUGNED AY U/S 143(3) 27/03/2015 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE WAS SADDLED WITH AD DITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTHINESS A ND GENUINENESS OF SHARE CAPITAL & SHARE PREMIUM PARTIES. NOTICES SENT U/S 133(6) ELICITED NO SATISF ACTORY RESPONSE WHICH LED THE LD. AO TO ADD THE SAME 4. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE AGITATED THE SAME WITHOUT A NY SUCCESS BEFORE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY VIDE IMPUG NED ORDER WHERE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO MAKE ANY EFFECTIVE REPRESENT ATION DESPITE BEING PROVIDED WITH SEVERAL OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HE ARD. THE LD. CIT(A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTUAL MATRI X AND EVIDENCES / EXPLANATIONS ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEE, CONFIRMED THE STAND OF LD. AO. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BE FORE US. 5. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, WE FIND THAT ONUS TO E GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS RESTED UPON ASSESSE E AND THE ASSESSEE HAS MISERABLY FAILED TO PROVE THE THREE IN GREDIENTS OF SECTION 68. THEREFORE, NO INFIRMITY COULD BE ORDER. ASSESSMENT YEAR NONE HAS APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE. THE PERUSAL OF ORDER SHEET ENTRIES REVEALS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NEVER ATTENDED THE HEARING / PROCEEDINGS ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION . LEFT WITH OPTION, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE - OFF THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD AND AFTER HEARING LD. DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE, WHO RELIED UPO N THE IMPUGNED ORDER. FROM PERUSAL OF RECORDS, IT TRANSPIRES THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ASSESSED FOR IMPUGNED AY U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 27/03/2015 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE WAS SADDLED WITH AD DITION ON UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 FOR RS .150 LACS SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTHINESS A ND GENUINENESS SHARE CAPITAL & SHARE PREMIUM STATED TO BE RECEIVED FROM THREE PARTIES. NOTICES SENT U/S 133(6) ELICITED NO SATISF ACTORY RESPONSE WHICH LED THE LD. AO TO ADD THE SAME U/S 68. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE AGITATED THE SAME WITHOUT A NY SUCCESS BEFORE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY VIDE IMPUG NED ORDER WHERE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO MAKE ANY EFFECTIVE REPRESENT ATION DESPITE BEING PROVIDED WITH SEVERAL OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HE ARD. THE LD. CIT(A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTUAL MATRI X AND EVIDENCES / EXPLANATIONS ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEE, CONFIRMED THE STAND OF LD. AO. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BE FORE US. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, WE FIND THAT ONUS TO E GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS RESTED UPON ASSESSE E AND THE ASSESSEE HAS MISERABLY FAILED TO PROVE THE THREE IN GREDIENTS OF SECTION 68. THEREFORE, NO INFIRMITY COULD BE FOUND IN THE IMPUGNED ITA NO.309/MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR - 2009-10 NONE HAS APPEARED FOR ASSESSEE DESPITE NOTICE. THE PERUSAL REVEALS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NEVER ATTENDED THE HEARING / PROCEEDINGS ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION . LEFT WITH NO OFF THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECORD AND AFTER HEARING LD. DEPARTMENT AL ASSESSEE WAS READ WITH SECTION 147 ON 27/03/2015 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE WAS SADDLED WITH AD DITION ON .150 LACS SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTHINESS A ND GENUINENESS STATED TO BE RECEIVED FROM THREE PARTIES. NOTICES SENT U/S 133(6) ELICITED NO SATISF ACTORY RESPONSE AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE AGITATED THE SAME WITHOUT A NY SUCCESS BEFORE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY VIDE IMPUG NED ORDER WHERE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO MAKE ANY EFFECTIVE REPRESENT ATION DESPITE BEING PROVIDED WITH SEVERAL OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HE ARD. RESULTANTLY, THE LD. CIT(A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTUAL MATRI X AND EVIDENCES / EXPLANATIONS ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEE, CONFIRMED THE STAND OF LD. AO. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BE FORE US. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, WE FIND THAT ONUS TO E STABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS RESTED UPON ASSESSE E AND THE ASSESSEE HAS MISERABLY FAILED TO PROVE THE THREE IN GREDIENTS OF IN THE IMPUGNED 6. THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONO UNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON SD/- (PAWAN SINGH) / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : SR.PS:-THIRUMALESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO 1. ! / THE APPELLANT 2. '# ! / THE RESPONDENT 3. $$% / THE CIT(A) 4. $$% / CIT CONCERNED 5. &''() $)* 6. '+,- GUARD FILE ASSESSMENT YEAR THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. UNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH FEBRUARY, 2019. SD/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 14.02.2019 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / THE APPELLANT / THE RESPONDENT / THE CIT(A) CONCERNED $)* / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI ! ' !#$ (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ITA NO.309/MUM/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR - 2009-10 FEBRUARY, 2019. (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI ! / BY ORDER, (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) / ITAT, MUMBAI.