YESUDHASON M. NADAR, MUMBAI V. ADDL CIT 23(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3694/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 71903 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-12-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 02-12-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R K SAHU
• Assessee Lawyers: C N VAZE
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I.T.A. NO.3694/M/2012 (AY: 2008 - 2009) YESUDHASON M NADAR, D - 1201, 12 TH FLOOR, JOY HOMES, LBS MARG, BHANDUP, MUMBAI - 400 078. / VS. ADDL CIT - 23(1), C - 10, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, 2 ND FLOOR, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI 400 051. ./ PAN : AACPN 2839 G ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI C.N. VAZE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.K. SAHU, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 02.12.2013 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11 .12.2013 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 24.5.2012 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 33, MUMBAI DATED 26.3.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 2009. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUND WHICH READS AS UNDER: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF UNSECURED LOANS OF RS. 35,00,000/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 3. AT THE OUTSET, SHRI C.N. VAZE, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MEN TIONED THAT THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 35 LAKHS ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS. IN THIS REGARD, LD COUNSEL MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND TOOK UNSECURED LOANS. ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE A O AND THE ASSESSED INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS. 84,64,940/ - AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 49,31,340/ - . DURING THE ASSESSMENT AO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 35 LAKHS U/S 68 OF 2 THE ACT FOR WANT OF EVIDENCES RELATING TO THE SAID LOANS. MATTER TRAVELLED TO THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 4. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY , ASSESSEE FURNISHED VALUABLE INFORMATION AND EVIDENCES AND INFORMED THAT THE SAID LOANS WERE REPAID P A R T L Y SUBSEQUENTLY. IN THIS REGARD, ASSESSEE FILED VARIOUS EVIDENCES IN CLUDING BANK STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE SAID CLAIMS. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, CIT (A) DULY REMANDED THESE EVIDENCES TO THE AO. UNFORTUNATELY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SUBMITTED THE REMAND REPORT ON 12.3.2012 BY STATING THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT PRODUCED ANY CONFIRMATION LETTERS OR ALTERNATIVELY BY PRODUCING ANY PRINCIPAL OFFICERS FROM ABOVE CONCERNS, LENDERS. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NO STAND TO SUPPORT HIS CLAIM. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, ISSUE MAY PLEASE BE DECIDED ON MERIT. FURTHER, HE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES PLACED AT PAGE 17 TO 126 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND SUBMITTED THAT THESE PAPERS IF TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, ASSESSING OFFICER WILL TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW IN THE MATTER. FOR THIS PURPOSE, HE PLEADED FOR REMANDING THE MATTER TO THE FILES OF THE AO FOR ADJUDICATING THE MATTER AFRESH. ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED A STATEMENT SHOWING VARIOUS DETAILS ABOUT THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR, GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE CREDITWORTHINESS AS WELL. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD DR RELIED VEHEMENTLY ON THE ORDER OF THE AO AND MENTIONED THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH T HE PARTIES ON THE LIMITED ISSUE OF REMANDING THE MATTER. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE PAPERS FILED BEFORE US IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK SHOWING RELEVANT DETAILS NECESSARY FOR APPRECIATION BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. THE REMAND REPORT ALSO INCLUDES THAT GR OSS VIOLATION IN NOT SUBMITTING THE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. CIT (A) ALSO HAS NOT DECIDED THE ISSUE IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THIS IS A FIT CASE FOR REMANDING THE MATTER FOR APPRECIATION OF THE FACTS AFTER DULY ADMITTING THE PAPER BOOK / ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE CIT (A). THEREFORE, WE REMAND THE MATTER TO THE FILES OF AO AND DIRECT THE AO TO ADMIT THE SAID EVIDENCES AND ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER GRANTING A REASONABLE OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO 3 THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 1 T H DECEMBER , 2013. S D / - S D / - (DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 1 1 .12 .2013 . . ./ OKK , 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 . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI