LILA Y. AUNDHE, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 18(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3492/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2994 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 08-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A RAMCHANDRAN
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Gift
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAMLAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3492/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) SMT.LILA Y.AUNDHE, 11,KAUSTU, ANANT PATIL MARG, DADAR (WEST), MUMBAI 400 028 PAN:AADPA 5295J ...... APPELLANT VS. THE DCIT, CEN. CIR.46, AAYKAR BHAVAN,M.K.ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 .... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A RAMCHANDRAN DATE OF HEARING : 08/09/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/09/2016 ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAI NING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 IS DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORD ER PASSED BY CIT(A)- 29 MUMBAI DATED 16/03/2010 WHICH IN TURN ARISES OUT OF AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 143(3 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 16/02/2008. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS NOTED THAT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR HAS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT PLACED 2 ITA NO. 3492/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) BEFORE US INSPITE OF NOTICE OF HEARING BEING SERV ED UPON THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE-OFF THE APPEAL EX- PARTE QUA THE APPELLANT AFTER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRES ENTATIVE ON MERITS IN TERMS OF RULE -24 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBU NAL) RULES, 1963. 3. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE AS SESSEE IS THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN TREATING THE GIFTS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.4,29,524/- AS UNEXPLAINED. 4. AFTER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E AND PERUSING THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, IT IS FOUND TH AT THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS T HE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE CASH GIFTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE OF RS.14,99,524/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECT ION 68 OF THE ACT. THE CIT(A) HELD THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL GIFTS, RS.10 ,70,000/- WAS RECEIVED FROM VERY CLOSE FAMILY MEMBERS AND RELATIVES AND, T HEREFORE, HE CONSIDERED THE SAME AS EXPLAINED AND THE BALANCE OF RS.4,29,524/- WAS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED. THIS ADDITION IS IN CHALLE NGE BEFORE US. 5. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) CLEARLY ESTABLISHES THAT EACH OF THE GIFT CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN APPROPRIATELY CONS IDERED. THE CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALS O CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AFTER CO NSIDERING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, THE CIT(A) HAS FOUND IT APPROPR IATE TO CONSIDER GIFTS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.10,70,000/- AS EXPLAINED. SO FAR AS THE AMOUNT OF GIFT OF RS.4,29,524/- IS CONCERNED, WE FIND NO REAS ON TO INTERFERE WITH THE CONCLUSION OF THE CIT(A), WHICH IS HEREBY AFFIR MED. NOTABLY, THE CIT(A) HAS CONCLUDED THAT THE PROBABILITY OF ASSES SEE HAVING RECEIVED 3 ITA NO. 3492/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) SUCH GIFTS FROM UNRELATED PARTIES IS DOUBTFUL. FOR THE SAID REASONS WE AFFIRM THE STAND OF THE CIT(A) AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS.4,29,524/- IS HEREBY SUSTAINED. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/09/2016 SD/- SD/- (RAMLAL NEGI) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOCUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 16/09/2016 VM , SR. PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT , 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI