ITO 15(1)(2), MUMBAI V. HARSH N. MEHTA, MUMBAI

ITA 3369/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 55258 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V V SHASTRI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Gift
• Section: 69; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIB UNAL MUMBAI BENCHES H, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, AM AND SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JM ITA NO.3369/MUM/2010 : ASST.YEARS 2007-2008 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 15(1)(2) MUMBAI. VS. SHRI HARSH N.MEHTA 904, 9 TH FLOOR, ADINATH SUDHA PARK SHANTIPATH ROAD, GARODIA NAGAR GHATKOPAR (EAST), MUMBAI 400 077. PAN : AJWPM9441J. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI V.V.SHASTRI RESPONDENT BY : --- NONE --- DATE OF HEARING : 13.09.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :16.09.2011 O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ON 26.02.2010 IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.35 LAKH MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT U/S 69 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED RETURN DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,55,780. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAVE MADE INVESTMENT IN RBI / RCCL AMOUN TING TO RS.35 LAKH. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED CERTAIN NOTICES TO THE ASS ESSEE. IN THE ABSENCE OF PROPER COMPLIANCE, THE ASSESSMENT WAS MADE U/S 144 IN WHIC H ADDITION OF RS.35 LAKH CAME TO BE MADE U/S 69 ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED IN VESTMENTS. IN THE FIRST APPEAL IT WAS CONTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT A S UM OF RS.35 LAKH WAS INVESTED IN BONDS OUT OF BANK ACCOUNT. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT TH E ASSESSEES NAME WAS JOINT WITH THE NAME OF HIS FATHER IN REC BOND OF RS.20 LA KH AND THAT INVESTMENT WAS MADE BY HIS FATHER WHO CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S 54EC W HICH WAS DULY ALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT ACCEPT ING THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT OF ITA NO.3369/MUM/2010 SHRI HARSH N.MEHTA. 2 RS.20 LAKH. REGARDING THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.15 LAKH IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT HE RECEIVED GIFTS FROM HIS FATHER ON 01.06.2006 AND 14 .08.2006 WHICH AMOUNT WAS INVESTED IN RBI, GOI (SBI) BONDS. THESE GIFTS WERE RECEIVED THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL AND THE SOURCE OF GIFT WAS EXPLAINED BY ASS ESSEES FATHER TO THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT. THE LEARNED CIT(A) GAVE AN OPPORTUN ITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR CONFIRMATION AND COUNTER COMMENTS TO THE ASSESS EES SUBMISSION WITH NECESSARY EVIDENCE. THE A.O. DID NOT FILE ANY COUNT ER COMMENT OR REPRESENTATION. IN THE LIGHT OF THESE FACTS, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OR DERED FOR THE DELETION OF THE ADDITION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE IS NO APPEARANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THE SOURCE O F RS.35 LAKH INVESTED IN BONDS AS THE AMOUNT HAVING BEEN RECEIVED FROM HIS FATHER IN INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AS WELL AS JOINT INVESTMENT WITH HIS FATHER IN THESE BONDS. SU CH SOURCE OF INVESTMENT, BEING THE CONTRIBUTION MADE BY THE FATHER, HAS BEEN DULY ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE WHILE MAKING SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEES FATHER . DESPITE GIVING SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY BY THE LEARNED CIT(A), THE ASSESSING OF FICER FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE A UTHORITY. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER WARRANTING ANY INTERFERENCE. THE SAM E IS UPHELD ON THIS ISSUE. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 16 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI : 16 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. DEVDAS* ITA NO.3369/MUM/2010 SHRI HARSH N.MEHTA. 3 COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) - XXVI, MUMBAI. 5. THE DR/ITAT, MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.