KARTIK DOSHI, MUMBAI V. ITO 22(2)(1), VASHI

ITA 3310/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2828 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 05-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S R SINGH
• Keywords: Business income; Earning of tax free income; Additional evidence; Onus to prove
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA , AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, J M ./ I.T.A. NO. 3310/MUM/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 ) KARTIK BHAR AT DOSHI, 1206, C WING, KRUSHAL TOWERS, NEAR SHOPPERS STOP, CHEMBUR TOWER, MUMBAI - 75 / VS. ITO - 22(2)(1), 4 TH FLOOR, TOWER NO. 6, VASHI STATION COMPLEX, VASHI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. AETPD 6457 R ( / APPELLANT ) : ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI JAYANT BHATT / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. R. SINGH / DATE OF HEARING : 05.5.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 . 7 .2016 / O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, A. M.: THIS IS AN A PPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 33 , MUMBAI (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 28.2.2013 , DISMISSING THE A SSESSEES APPEAL CONTESTING ITS ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE IN COME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y.) 2009 - 10 VIDE ORDER DATED 16.12.2011 . 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ON THE BASIS OF THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE WITH THE R EV ENUE, THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CASH DEPOSITS DURING T HE RELEVANT YEAR IN HIS BANK ACCOUNTS WITH COSMOS CO - OPERATI VE B ANK (AT RS.2 2.20 L ACS) AND AXIS B ANK LTD (AT 2 ITA NO. 3310/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009 - 10) KARTIK BHARAT DOSHI VS. ITO RS. 19.15 L ACS), BOTH OF WHICH (BANK ACCOUNTS ) WERE NOT DISCLOSED (BY THE ASSESSEE) TO THE R EVENUE. IN EXP LANAT ION IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THE BANK ACCOUNTS WERE JOINT ACCOUNTS, WITH THE ASSESSEE BEING A JOINT HOLDER IN BOTH. HOWEVER, ONLY THE TRANSACTIONS REFLECTED IN THE AXIS BANK ACCOUNT, WHERE HE I S THE FIRST HOLDER, PERTAIN TO HIM, WHILE THAT IN COSMOS CO - OPERATI VE B ANK ACCOUNT WERE, SIMILARLY , OF HIS FATHER, SH RI BHARAT A. DOSHI, THE FIRST HOLDER FOR THAT ACCOUNT, AND PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WHOM WERE SIMULTANEOUSLY TAKEN UP BY THE R EVENUE. FURTHER, OF THE TOTAL CASH DEPOSITS OF RS.19.15 L ACS WITH AXIS B ANK, SINCE OW NED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE A SSESSING OFFICER (AO) FOUND THE ASSESSEE S EXPLANATION AS REASONABLE TOWARDS DEP OSITS F OR RS. 2.46 L ACS, ADDING THE BALANCE OF RS. 16. 69 L ACS AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME , DEEMED AS SO U /S. 69. FOR THE BALANCE DEPOSIT OF RS.20,26,447 / - IN THE SAID ACCOUNT , CREDIT ED ON 07.11.2008, HE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION, I.E., OF THE SAME , BEING FROM A SHARE BROKER, M/S. PRABHUDAS LILLADHAR PVT. LTD. (PLPL), BELONGING TO HIS FATHER, WHO ALSO HAD TRANSACTIONS WITH THE SAID COMPANY, INADVERTE NTLY DEPOSITED IN THE AXIS BANK A/C, AND HONORED BY THE BANK IN - AS - MUCH AS SH. BHARAT DOSHI WAS ALSO A ( JOINT ) ACC OUNT HOLDER, AS MERELY AN AFTER - THOUGHT. THE SAME , FROM THE SAID SHARE BROKER, I.E., PLPL, APPEARED TO BE THE C LOSURE PROCEEDS OF ANOTHER ACCO UNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE SAID COMPANY, AND WERE UTILIZED FOR TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO PLPL AS WELL AS MAKING FIXED DEPOSITS (WITH AXIS BANK). THE SAME WAS, ACCORDINGLY, BROUGHT TO TAX U/S. 69 A ON ACCOUNT OF BEING NOT EXPLAINED SATISFACTORILY AS TO ITS NATU RE AND SOURCE OF ACQUISITION . WITH REGARD TO THE TRANSACTIONS WITH COSMOS CO - OPERATIVE B ANK, THE AO CO NSIDER ED THE ASSESSEE S EXPLANATION OF THE SAME AS BELONGING TO HIS FATHER, THE FIRST ACCOUNT HOLDER OF THAT ACCOUNT, AS REASONABLE; THE TRANSACTIONS BEIN G OWNED BY HIS FATHER. THE ADDITIONS MADE BEING CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE SAME BASIS, THE ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL. IN ADDITION, THE ASSESSEE ALSO CLAIMS SET O FF OF SHARE TRADING LOSS OF RS. 6,32,213/ - VIDE HIS FOURTH GROUND, WITH GD. 1 BEING GENERAL IN NATURE. 3 ITA NO. 3310/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009 - 10) KARTIK BHARAT DOSHI VS. ITO 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. 3.1 WE SHALL DISCUSS BOTH THE ADDITIONS IN SERIATIM. AS REGARDS THE DEPOSITS IN AXIS B ANK, OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE S EXPLANATION FOR THE SOURCE OF THE IMPUGN ED DEPOSIT ( OF RS. 1 6.69 L ACS) IS AS UNDER: A) RS.1 3 ,25,250 / - BY WAY OF BROKERAGE INCOME; B) RS.3.78 L ACS RECEIVED BACK FROM THREE DIFFERENT PERSONS TO WHOM ADVANCES (FOR DIFFERENT AMOUNTS) WERE GIVEN. AS REGARDS THE FIRST SU M, THE EXPLANATION IS NEITHER HERE NOR THERE. THIS IS AS THE BROKERAGE INCOME IS ADMITTEDLY UNDISCLOSED (TO THE R EVENUE). AS SUCH, IT MATTERS LITTLE WHETHER THE DEPOSITS HAVE BEEN FINANC ED BY THE UNDISCLOSED BROKERAGE INCOME, OR FROM ANY OTHER SOURCE. THE LATTER SUM (RS. 3.78 LACS) WAS ALSO ADMITTED BEFORE US BY THE LD. A UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (AR), THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL, AS CONCEDED IN - AS - MUCH AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS IN ITS RESPECT AT ANY STAGE . WE FIND NO REASON NOT TO AND, ACCORDINGLY, HO LD THE ADDI TION FOR RS.1 6 .69 L ACS, TOWARD THE DEPOSITS IN THE ASSESSEES AXIS B ANK ACCOUNT , AS LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME, DEEMED SO U /S. 69 OF THE A CT. WHEN WE STATE SO , WE DO SO ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE , I.E., OF THE ASSESSEE S EXPLANATION , AND NO T ON THE BASIS OF A CONCESSION THE MATTER BEING PURELY FACTUAL. 3.2 W E MAY NEXT DISCUSS THE CREDIT IN THE AXIS B ANK ACCOUNT FOR RS.2 0 , 26,4 47 / - , EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE A S HAVING BEEN RECEIVED FROM PL PL, WITH WHICH HE HAD A REGULAR ACCOUNT, PER CHEQUE IN THE NAME OF HIS FATHER , SHRI BHARAT A. DOSHI, WHO ALSO HAD ACCOUNT THEREWITH, THOUGH INADVERTENTLY DEPOSITED BY HIM (ASSESSEE) IN HIS ACCOUNT WITH AXIS B ANK. THE SAME STOOD HONOURED ON PRESENTATION AS SHRI BHARAT A. DOSHI WAS ALSO ONE OF THE ACCOUNT HOL DERS OF THE AXIS BANK ACCOUNT . THIS EXPLANATION HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE R EVENUE AS AN AFTER - THOUGHT; THE ASSESSEE HAVING DEPOSED PER AN AFFIDAVIT (FURNISHED DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS) , AVER RING THAT ALL THE TRANSACTIONS WITH AXIS B A NK PERTAINED TO H IM ALONE. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO DECLINED TO 4 ITA NO. 3310/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009 - 10) KARTIK BHARAT DOSHI VS. ITO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SOUGHT TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS AS NO APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A (OF THE I NCOME T AX R ULES, 1962 THE R ULES HEREINAFTER) HAD BEEN MADE. IN OUR VIEW, THE R EVENUE HAS REJECTED THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION WITHOUT SUBJECTING IT TO VERIFICATION, MUCH LESS PROPER VERIFICATION . AS IT APPEARS , THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH AXIS B ANK IS BEING USED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHILE THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH COSMOS CO - OPERATIVE B ANK BY HIS FATHER, FOR ROUTIN G TRANSACTIONS AND CHANNELING FUNDS OF THEIR SHARE TRADING/BROKERAGE ACTIVITY, AS WELL AS, TRANSFER FUNDS OF THESE ACTIVITIES TO EACH OTHER AND, PERHAPS, EVEN TO O THER FAMILY MEMBERS. THE ASSESSEE HAS, AT THE THRESHOLD , COMPILED HIS ACCOUN TS RELATING TO THE UNDISCLOSED TRANSACTIONS, FURNISHING TH EM IN THE FORM OF PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ; CAPITAL ACCOUNT ; AND BALANCE - SHEET (AS ON 31 .3. 2009), FURNISHED BEFORE BOTH THE AO AND THE LD. CIT(A) (PB PAGE 5 ), REPRODUCED AS UNDER: KARTIK BHARAT D OSHI TRADING, PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2009 PARTICULARS PARTICULARS AMOUNT SHARE TRADING LOSS NET PROFIT 632,213.53 BUSINESS INCOME GROSS RECEIPTS 1,325,250.00 632,213.53 693,036.47 TOTAL 1,325,250.00 TOTAL 1,325,250.00 PERSONAL CAPITAL ACCOUNT PARTICULARS PARTICULARS AMOUNT DRAWINGS 91,086.86 OPENING BALANCE B/F 643,212.41 INCOME FROM BUSINESS NET PROFIT 693,036.47 INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES INTEREST - FIXED DEPOSIT 35,551.00 EXEMPT INCOME DIVIDEND 46,338.75 91,086.86 CLOSING BALANCE C/F 1,327,051.77 TOTAL 1,418,138.63 TOTAL 1,418,138.63 5 ITA NO. 3310/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009 - 10) KARTIK BHARAT DOSHI VS. ITO PERSONAL BALANCE SHEET AS ON MARCH 31, 2009 LIABILITIES AMOUNT ASSETS AMOUNT CAPITAL ACCOUNT KARTIK B DOSHI 1,327,051.77 INVESTMENTS INV - FIXED DEPOSIT AXIS BANK 755, 000.00 UNSECURED LOAN BHARAT DOSHI 505,215.06 CURRENT ASSETS, LOANS & ADVANCES SHARES 319,259.00 PRABHUDAS LILADHER PVT. LTD. 349,811.60 PRABHUDAS LILADHER P L - MARGIN 88,306.44 NEELA DOSHI 83,179.00 CA SH & BANK BALANCE CASH IN HAND 64,609.00 AXIS BANK LTD. 172,101.79 TOTAL 1,832,266.83 TOTAL 1,832,266.83 ALL THE TRANSACTIONS WITH PL PL, SINCE CONFIRMED BY THE SAID BROKER, BOTH WITH THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FATHER, WERE ALSO SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) (PB PG S . 9 - 18). THE IMPUGNED CREDIT (OF RS.20.26 LACS) DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE L EDGER ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF PLPL, SUBMITTED IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS (REFER PARA 4.1 OF TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER). T HE F URTHER DOCUMENTS FURNISHED IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS WERE ONLY IN SUBSTANTIATION OF HIS CLAIMS AND, RATHER, BEING CORROBORATIVE, OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN ADMITTED BY THE LD. CIT (A) (REFER : SMT. PRABHAVATI S. SHAH VS. CIT [1998] 2 31 ITR 1 ( BOM )). ONCE THE TRANSACTIONS WITH PL PL ARE ADMITTEDLY UNDISCLOSED, ANY CREDIT ( TRANSFER OF FUNDS) FROM IT, WHETHER ON ACCOUNT OF INCOME OR ON CAPITAL ACCOUNT, IS LIABLE TO BE DEEMED AS INCOME U /S. 69. THE ONLY CAUTION THAT NEEDS TO BE EXERCISED IS THAT TH ERE IS NO DUPLICATION OR EXCESS ADDITION IN - AS - MUCH AS THE SAME FUNDS MAY BE ROTATED /CIRCULATED . THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEES FATHER HAS BEEN, AS GIVEN TO UNDERSTAND, FRAMED ON THE BASIS THAT THE IMPUGNED CREDIT BELONGS TO HIM, AND FOR WHICH CREDIT , AC CORDINGLY, STANDS ALLOWED TO HIM, BOTH BY THE BROKER ( PL PL ) , I.E., IN ITS ACCOUNTS , AS WELL AS BY THE ASSESSEE IN HI S 6 ITA NO. 3310/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009 - 10) KARTIK BHARAT DOSHI VS. ITO ACCOUNTS IN - AS - MUCH AS THE AMOUNT STANDS DEPOSITED IN THE ASSESSEE S BANK ACCOUNT (WITH AXIS BANK) . HOW CAN, WE WONDER, THE CREDIT BE CONS IDERED AS BELONGING TO BOTH - THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FATHER , AT THE SAME TIME ? HOW CAN THE VERACITY OF THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION BE CONSIDERED DE HORS THE ACCOUNTS OF THE THREE PARTIES, I.E., THE ASSESSEE, HIS FATHER AND PLPL , WHICH ARE STATED TO BE, AND AP PEAR TO BE, IN AGREEMENT. THIS MAY INCLUDE VERIFICATION OF THE UNDERLYING TRANSACTIONS /VOUCHER S , I.E., WITH REFERENCE TO (WHICH) THE PAYMENT I S MADE. THE ASSESSEE HAVING DRAWN THE ACCOUNTS OF HIS UNDISCLOSED TRANSACTIONS, THE SAME ( ACCOUNT S ) CONSTITUTE THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION - IN FACT, THE SUBSTRATUM OF H IS CASE, EXPLAIN AS THEY DO, AT THE SAME TIME, THE SOURCE A ND APPLICATION OF FUNDS WITH HIM . T HE R EVENUE HAS IN OUR VIEW FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE SAME. FURTHER, NOTHING THEREFORE TURNS ON THE APPLICATIO N ON THE SAID SUM FOR THE ASSESSEES OWN PURPOSES, AS FOR INVESTMENT IN FDRS (WITH A XIS BANK ), TAKEN NOTE OF ADVERSELY BY THE LD. CIT ( A ) . T HE AMOUNT OUTSTANDING IN THE FATHERS ACCOUNT AS AT THE YEAR - END (RS.5.05 LACS) , RATHER ONLY IMPLIES PAYMENT OF THE B ALANCE RS.15.21 LACS (RS.20.26 LACS RS.5.05 LACS) TO HIM DURING T HE YEAR. WE HAVE ALREADY NOTED THAT THE TRANSACTIONS WITH PLPL BEING UNACCOUNTED, ALL THE PAYMENTS , EITHER ON TRADING OR CAPITAL ACCOUNT, WOULD STAND TO BE DEEMED AS INCOME, EVEN AS THERE C OULD BE NO DOUBLE AD DITION, AND IT IS TOWARD THIS THAT THE ACCOUNTS ASSUME SIGNIFICANCE AND RELEVANCE. WHY, IN THE ADMITTED FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITS WITH PLPL (AT RS.4,38,1 1 8 / - IN T W O ACCOUNTS), BESIDES INVESTMENT IN SHARES (RS. 3.19 L AC S ) , DEPOSIT WITH / LOAN TO NEELA DOSHI (RS.83,179/ - ) AND CASH (RS.6 4 ,609 / - ) AS ON 31 .3. 2009 (REFER BALANCE - SHEET) . THE SAME, AGAIN, WOULD STAND TO BE SEPARATELY ADDED, I.E., IF THE ACCOUNTS ARE NOT REGARDED, WHILE WE OBSERVE THAT THE AO HAS HIMSELF, WHILE NO TICING TH E SAME, LEFT OUT THE INVESTMENT BY WAY OF FDR /S AT RS. 7.55 L ACS (AS ON 31 .03. 2009) ONLY ON THAT BASIS, I.E., THAT THE SAME REPRESENTS APPLI CATION OF THE SUM RECEIVED (RS. 2 0.26 L ACS), BROUGHT TO TAX BY HIM. IF THE ACCOUNTS OF THE THREE PARTIES, THE ASSESSEE, HIS FATHER AND PLPL, MATCH, I.E., RECONCILE , AND THE TRANSACTIONS PROVED, IT IS ONLY THE CAPITAL AS ON 31 .03. 2009, I.E., RS.13.27 L ACS, THAT OUGHT TO BE ASSESS ED AS 7 ITA NO. 3310/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009 - 10) KARTIK BHARAT DOSHI VS. ITO INCOME, WHILE THE R EVENUE HAS ALREADY BROUGHT RS. 16.69 L ACS TO TAX. THAT IS, THE SAME MAY STAND TO BE RESTRICTED TO RS . 13.27 L ACS, OF WHICH, AGAIN, RS. 46 , 3 39 / - , BEING STATED TO BE BY WAY OF DIVIDEND, SHALL, WHERE SO, BE EXEMPT U /S. 1 0. THESE DIRECTIONS WOULD, OF COURSE, AS AFORESAI D, BE SUBJECT TO THE ASSESSEE PROVING THE SAME. THIS I S FURTHER SUBJECT TO THE CAVEAT T HAT IF THE PEAK INVESTMENT/DEPOSITS (NET OF LIABILITIES) AT ANY TIME DURING THE YEAR EXCEED S THIS SUM, THE ADDITION COULD EXCEED THE (NET) INVESTMENT AS ON 31.3.2009 (RS.13.27 LACS), WHICH SUM MAY NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE PEAK CAPITAL FOR THE YEAR. THE ACCOUNTS FURNISHED BEING ADMITTEDLY OF UNDISCLOSED BUSINESS/TRANSACTIONS, ALL THE DEPOSITS, INCLUDING THE CASH DEPOSITS FOR RS.2.46 LACS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, EXCEPT WHERE FOUND BY HIM AS REPRESENTING A GENUI NE LIABILITY OF THE ASSESSEE, WOULD ALSO STAND TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN RECKONING THE PEAK CAPITAL. T HE REVENUE IS AT LIBERTY, RATHER DUTY - BOUND , TO EXAMINE THE CLAIMS FOR THE IR CORRECTNESS, AND THE ASSESSEE CO RRESPONDINGLY OBLIGED TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIMS. THERE IS ALSO NO QUESTION OF A SET O F F OF THE SHARE TRADING LOSS (RS. 6.32 LACS) . TH E SAME, WITHOUT DOUBT, FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS, WOULD STAND TO BE INCLUDED IN RECKONING THE CAPITAL. HOWEVER, WH AT IS SOUGHT TO BE ASSESSED (AS INCOME) IS THE UNDISCLOSED CAPITAL , STATED AS INVESTED IN DIFFERENT ASSETS, SO THAT THE SA ID LOSS STAND S ALREADY ADJUSTED IN ARRIV ING AT THE NET CAPITAL , I.E., W.E.F. THE DATE OF IN CURRING T HE LIABILITY . WE HAVE ALREADY CLARIFIED THAT THE TOTAL ADDITION CANNOT POSSIBLY E XCEED THE PEAK CAPITAL (I.E., ASSETS MINUS LIABILITIES) AT ANY TIME DURING THE YEAR. IF THE PEAK VALUE , I.E., IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE INCURRING THE LIABILITY ON SHARE TRADING LOSS AND/OR THE RECEIPT OF FU NDS BELONGING TO THE FATHER, EXCE EDS THE CAPITAL (O F THE UNDISCLOSED BUSINESS AS AT THE YEAR - END RS.13.27 LACS), IT IS THIS PEAK, BEING THE UNEXPLAINED ASSETS WITH THE ASSESSEE AT ANY TIME DURING THE YEAR, THAT IS TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX U/S.69/69A. 3.3 THIS LEAVES US WITH THREE DEPOSITS OF RS. 2.65 LACS, RS.50,000/ - AND RS. 63,000 / - , I.E., AT A TOTAL OF RS.3.78 L ACS, EXPLAINED TO BE CASH DEPOSITS OUT OF WITHDRAWALS MADE 8 ITA NO. 3310/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009 - 10) KARTIK BHARAT DOSHI VS. ITO EARLIER. THE SAME, THOUGH INCLUDED IN THE IMPUGNED SUM OF RS.1 6.6 9 L ACS IS, HOWEVER, CONSPICUOUSLY ABSENT FROM THE ASSESSEES ACCOUNTS. WHY , AND HOW? AS IT APPEARS, THESE ACCOUNTS FORM PART OF THE OPENING CAPITAL, FOR WHICH NO EX CLUSION HAS BEEN EITHER CLAIMED OR CONSIDERED BY US IN VIEW OF THE ACTIVITY AND, CONSEQUENTLY, THE TRANSACTIONS BEING UNDISCLOSED, SO THAT THE SAME WERE FOUND BY THE R EVENUE, I.E., CAME TO SURFACE, ONLY FOR THE CURRENT YEAR. THE SAME BEING UNEXPLAINED AS TO THEIR NATURE AND SOURCE ARE TO BE REGARDED AS , AND FORM PART OF THE (OR CREDITED TO THE) CAPITAL (ACCOUNT) ON RECEIPT (DURING THE YEAR), WHICH (CAPITAL ACCOUNT) , MA Y NEED TO BE REDRAWN. 4. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ONLY CONSIDER IT FIT & PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND RES TORE THE ASSESSMENT QUA THE S E ADDITION S BEING IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSEES UNDISCLOSED ASSETS, BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR PROPER FACTUAL DETERMINATION, WHICH H E SHALL DO BY ISSUING DEFINITE FINDINGS OF FACT, KEEPING IN VIEW THE OBSERVAT IONS AND FINDINGS PER T HIS ORDER. WE MAY ONCE AGAIN CLARIFY THAT THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO ESTABLISH ITS CLAIMS WOULD BE ON THE ASSESSEE . IN SUM, WE HAVE, FINDING THEM TO BE OF THE SAME GENRE, UPHELD THE ADDITION (IN PRINCIPLE) FOR ALL THE CREDITS IN THE ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT, WH ERE ARE ON OWN ACCOUNT, WHILE REQUIRING VERIFICATION WHERE STATED AS ON ACCOUNT OF ANOTHER ( AS FOR RS. 20.26 LACS RECEIVED FROM PLPL, OSTENSIBLY ON BEHALF OF SH. BHARAT A. DOSHI), FURTHER DIRECTING FOR A CAP ON THE TOTAL ADDITION AT THE PEAK VALUE OF ASSETS, NET OF ACCEPTED LIABILITIES, AT ANY TIME DURING THE YEAR. A FURTHER DEDUCTION MAY ENSUE TO THE EXTENT THE SAME IS CONFIRMED AS COMPRISED OF CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OF DIVIDEND (ON SHARES), STATED TO BE RECEIVED AT RS.46,339/ - DURING THE YEAR, IN - AS - MUCH AS THE SAME CONSTITUTES TAX - EXEMPT INCOME FOR THE CURRENT YEAR . LEAST ONE CONSIDERS OF US TO HAVE TRAVELLED OUTSIDER OUR PURVIEW, WE MAY ADVERT TO THE DECISIONS IN KAPURCHAND SHRIMAL VS. CIT [ 1981 ] 131 ITR 0451 (SC); AHMEDABAD ELECTRICITY CO. LTD. VS. CIT [ 1993 ] 199 ITR 0351 (BOM) (FB) . WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 9 ITA NO. 3310/MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009 - 10) KARTIK BHARAT DOSHI VS. ITO 5. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, I.E., ON THE AFORESAID TERMS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JU LY 11 , 201 6 SD/ - SD/ - ( RAM LAL NEGI ) (S ANJAY ARORA) / J UDICIAL MEMBER / A CCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 11 . 0 7 .201 6 . . ./ ROSHANI , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 4. / CIT - CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD F ILE / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI