VAISHALI DHARGALKAR, MUMBAI V. ITO 11(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 3106/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5809 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIJAY KUMAR SONI
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3106/MUM/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 DR. VAISHALI DHARGALKAR, C/O. V.S. GOKHALE, FLAT NO. 404, GURUKRUPA BUILDING, PLOT NO. 19/324, KASTUR PARK, SHIMPOLI ROAD, BORIVALI WEST, MUMBAI [PAN : AEJPD5685F] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER-11(3)(4), MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIJAY KUMAR SONI, DR DATE OF HEARING : 30-01-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01-02-2019 O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX(APPEALS)-7, MUMBAI, DATED 02-03-2018 FOR THE AY. 2008-09. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 30-01-2019. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD ON THE ADDR ESS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM NO. 36 I.E. THE APPE AL MEMO. ITA NO. 3106/MUM/2018 : 2 : THE SAID NOTICE HAS COME BACK UN-SERVED. THE ASSESSE E HAS NOT INTIMATED ABOUT ANY NEW ADDRESS AND HENCE, SERVICE OF NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE IS NOT POSSIBLE. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND THERE IS NO REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. THEREFORE, IN THE PRESENT FAC TS, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS HEARD EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 3. LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR FOR TH E REVENUE AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES B ELOW AND MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIND THAT THE ONLY ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS REGARDING ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT ASSESSEE HA S RECEIVED UNSECURED LOAN OF RS. 3.90 LAKHS, FOR WHIC H ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE AO U/S. 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT (ACT) AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). I FIND THAT A CATEGORICAL FINDING WAS GIVEN BY CIT (A) IN HIS ORDER THAT DURING THE ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE GENU INENESS OF LOAN OF RS. 3.90 LAKS BEFORE THE AO. HE ALSO NO TED THAT AO HAD ISSUED NUMEROUS NOTICES AND FINAL SHOW CAUSE NO TICE WAS ISSUED BEFORE MAKING THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE AND IN THE END, AO WAS ITA NO. 3106/MUM/2018 : 3 : CONSTRAINED TO PASS EX-PARTE ORDER. THEREAFTER, HE FURTHER NOTED THAT DURING REMAND PROCEEDINGS ALSO, AN OPPORTUNI TY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AGAINBUT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE LOAN BEFORE THE AO. BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ALSO, NOBODY COULD APPEAR ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE NOTICE COULD NOT BE SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. CONSIDERING ALL THESE FACTS, I FIND NO REASON TO INTERF ERE WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(A). GROUNDS RAISED BY ASSESSEE ARE REJECTED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /MUMBAI; /DATED : 1 ST FEBRUARY, 2019 TNMM ITA NO. 3106/MUM/2018 : 4 : / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ! / THE APPELLANT 2. ' ! / THE RESPONDENT 3. # $ ( ) / THE CIT(A), MUMBAI 4. # $ / CIT, MUMBAI 5. '()*+ , #-*+#. , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. )/01 / GUARD FILE # / BY ORDER, ' //TRUE COPY// /# (DY./ASST. REGISTRAR) #-*+#., / ITAT, MUMBAI