AAS MOHAMMED KHAN (PROP.PERFECT STEEL CORPORATION), MUMBAI V. ITO 26(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5033/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8177 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 24-07-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N HEMALATHA

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) I.T.A. NO. 5053 /MUM/ 2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 13 - 14 ) AB UNIVERSAL P RIVATE LTD. 213, RAHEJA CENTRE FIRST FLOOR, NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI - 400 021. PAN : AAACT2114K V S . INCO ME TAX OFFICER 1(3)(1), ROOM NO. 540 AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI - 400 020. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY MS. N. HEMALATHA DATE OF HEARING 7 .1 2 . 201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 7 . 12 . 201 7 O R D E R THE APPEAL FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.5.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) - 3, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 2013 - 14. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF ` 2 LAKHS RELATING TO CASH DEPOSIT MADE INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. ON THE LAST OCCASION THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE GIVING IT A LAST CHANCE. THE ASSESSEE HAS AGAIN MOVED AN APPLICATION SEEKING ADJOURNMENT . H ENCE THE REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT IS REJECTED AND THE CASE IS DECIDED ON MERITS EX - PARTE, WITHOUT PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. I HEARD LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER RECEIVED AIR INFORMATION TO THE EFFECT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED ` 2 LAKHS BY WAY OF CASH IN THE STANDARD CHARTERED BANK ON 8.8.2012. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID DEPOSIT WAS MADE OUT OF CASH BALANCE AVAILABLE ON HAND , YET ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE SAME ON THE REASONING THAT THE ASSESSEE DI D NOT SUBSTANTIATE ITS EXPLANATION. AB UNIVERSAL PVT. LTD. 2 THE LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE SAME AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL. 4. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS APPEARS TO BE THAT IT WAS HOLDING CASH BALANCE OF ABOUT ` 10 LAKHS AT THE OPENING DATE OF THE YEAR I N ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND IMPUGNED DEPOSIT OF ` 2 LAKHS IS DEPOSITED OUT OF THE SAME. IN THAT CASE, THIS DEPOSIT SHOULD HAVE BE E N REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT CLEAR FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS TO WHETHER THE ASS ESSING OFFICER EXAMINED CASH BOOK OF THE ASSESSEE OR NOT. IN MY VIEW, VERIFICATION OF THE CASH BOOK MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY HELP TO PROVE THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE CASH BOOK HAS NOT BEEN VERIFIED, I AM OF THE VIEW THIS ISSUE REQUIRES FRESH EXAMINATION AT THE END OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, I SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE SAME AFRESH BY DULY EXAMINING CASH BOOK OF THE ASSESSEE. I ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH CASH BOOK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ALSO FURNISH NECESSARY INFORMATION/EXPLANATION S THAT MAY BE CALLED FOR BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IF THE ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK AND THE IMPUGNED DEPOSITS ARE REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, THEN NO ADDITION IS CALLED FOR. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY THE SAME AND TAKE THE VIEW IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AND ALSO IN THE LIGHT OF DISCUSSIONS MADE SUPRA. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 7 .1 2 . 201 7. SD/ - (B.R.BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 7 / 1 2 / 20 1 7 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT AB UNIVERSAL PVT. LTD. 3 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR /SENIOR PS ) PS ITAT, MUMBAI