ACIT - 22(1), MUMBAI V. GIRISH MATLANI, MUMBAI

ITA 5105/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1821 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R KAVITHA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Source of fund; Proportionate interest; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 142(1); 131

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012 - 13 ) ASST. CIT - 21, ROOM NO. 116, 1 ST FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL, MUMBAI - 400 012 VS. SHRI GI RISH MATLANI 74, VIMAL UDYOG BHAVAN, 3 RD FLOOR, OPP. STAR CITY CINEMA, SHIVAJI PARK, MATUNGA (W), MUMBAI - 400 012 PAN/GIR NO. ACLPM 6822 H ( APPELLANT ) : ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R. KAVITHA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI HITESH CHIMNANI DATE O F HEARING : 30.08.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.11 .2018 O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A. M.: THIS A PPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 34, MUMBAI ( LD.CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 12.05. 2016 AND PERTAINS TO THE A SSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y.) 2012 - 13. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER: I. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN GRANTING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE, CLAIMED AS BROKERAGE EXPENSES OF RS. 34,3757 - UNDER SECTION 57 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT AGAI NST INTEREST INCOME IGNORING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAD NOT FILED THE REQUIRED SUPPORTING EVIDENCES. II. THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN GRANTING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE, CLAIMED AS DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 57 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT BEING INTEREST PAID, IGNORING THE FACT THAT BORROWED FUNDS WERE UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND TO HIS PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THAT THE INTEREST EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF INTEREST EARNED FROM OTHER SOURCES WERE TO BE ALLOWED. 2 ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 SHRI GIRISH MATLANI III. TH E LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN LAW AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 9,28,20,1467 - BEING UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS AND EXPENDITURE, IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE COMPLETE LEDGER ACCOUNT WITH TRANSACTIONS OR A N EXPLANATION AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED FOR PERSONAL ATTENDANCE. IV THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (APPEALS) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE AO BE RESTORED. APROPOS GROUND NO.1 : 3. BR IEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED RS.34,375/ - AS BROKERAGE EXPENSES U/S 57 OF THE IT. ACT'61 AGAINST INTEREST INCOME. VIDE ORDERSHEET NOTING DATED 05.12.2014, 18.12.201 4 AND 142(1) NOTICE DATED 15.12.2014, 24.02.2015 THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FILE THE DETAILS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR THE SAME. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVIDE ANY EXPLANATION OR SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION, RS 34,375/ - , BEING EXPENSES CLAIMED U/S 57 WAS DISALLOWED AND ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. UPON THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: AS FAR AS DISALLOWANCE OF BROKERAGE EXPENSES IS CON CERNED, IT IS SEEN T HAT THE APPELLANT HAD SUBMITTED THE COPIES OF DEBIT N OTES OF BROKERS TOTALING TO RS.34,375/ - DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE BROKERAGE OF RS.34,375/ - IS REQUIRED TO BE ALLOWED AS EXPENDIT URE. 5. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM BY NOTING THAT THE COPIES OF DEBIT NOTES OF 3 ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 SHRI GIRISH MATLANI BROKERS WERE ALREADY SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH THE A.O. HAS NOT CONSIDERED. IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE FINDING OF THE FACTS BY THE LD. CIT(A), WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THIS ORDER AND, HENCE, WE UPHOLD THE SAME. APROPOS GROUND NO. 2: 7. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED RS . 51,86,511/ - AS DEDUCTION U/S 57 OF THE IT ACT'61 BEING INTEREST PAID. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FILE THE DETAILS OF INTEREST INCOME EARNED ALONG WITH DETAILS OF INTEREST EXPENSES CLAIMED U/S 57 OF THE IT ACT'61. V IDE ORDER SHEET NOTING DATED 05.12.2014, 18.12.2014 AND 142(1) NOTICE DATED 02.12.2014, 15.12.2014, 24.02.2015, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FILE THE DETAILS OF LOANS AND ADVANCES GIVEN AND THE INTEREST CHARGED ALONG WITH DETAILS OF LOANS A ND ADVANCES TAKEN AND THEIR RATE O F INTEREST. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE ONLY SUBMITTED THE OUTSTANDING BALANCES OF LOAN ACCOUNTS IN RESPONSE TO THESE QUERIES. THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF P ARTIES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ALSO HAD ONLY MONTHLY SUMMARY OF TRANSACTIONS WITHOUT REV EALING THE PARTY WISE DETAILS OF INTEREST PAYMENTS. THE A.O. FURTHER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS SPE CIFICALLY ASKED TO PROVIDE THE DETAILS OF LOANS AND ADVANCE IN FORMAT SPECIFIED BELOW. HOWEVER, INSPITE OF BEING GIVEN MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES TH E ASSESSEE FAILED TO FILE THE COMPLETE DETAILS. NAME, PAN, ADDRESS OPENING BALANCE DEBIT CREDIT CLOSING BALANCE RATE OF INTEREST INTEREST PAID/RECEIVED 8. THE ASSESSING OFFICER (A.O. FOR SHORT) FURTHER NOTED THAT WHEN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE FI NALLY SUBMITTED BY HIM, THE SAME WERE MARKED AS 'PRINTED ON 4 ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 SHRI GIRISH MATLANI 16.03.2013'. HE OBSERVED THAT T HIS IS MENTIONED HERE TO ENSURE THAT THE ASSESSEE DOESN'T TAKE SIMILAR PLEA DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THAT HE COULDN'T PRODUCE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS THEY WERE NOT MAINTAINED. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THERE HAS BEEN A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO MISGUIDE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DEL AY THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 9. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, ON PERUS AL OF THE BALANCE SHEET, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID INTEREST OF RS . 51,86,511/ - TO VARIOUS PARTIES. THE LOANS OUTSTANDING AS ON 31.03.2012 BEING RS . 5,85,35,630/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAD EXTENDED A LOA N OF RS . 1,11,09,943. 74/ - TO SONIC BIOCHEM EXTRACTIONS LTD, A COMPANY IN WHICH HE IS MAJORITY SHAREHOLDER AND DIRECTOR. THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED ENTIRE EXPENSES OF RS 51,86,51 1 / - AGAINST INTEREST INCOME OF RS . 53,50,636/ - . FURTHER, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND HIS OTHER PROPRIETORSHIP FIRMS OUT OF THE BORROWED CAPITAL. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO BOUGHT PREFERENCE SHARES OF SBEL FOR RS. 4,80,00,000/ - DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 10. THE A.O. CONCLUDED AS UNDER: 5.12 AS HIG HLIGHTED IN PARA 5.4 ABOVE, ON PERUSAL OF THE BALANCE SHEET, IT WAS CLEARLY ITABLISHED THAT THE BORROWED FUNDS WERE UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND HIS OTHER PROPRIETORSHIP FIRMS. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE INTEREST EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF INTEREST INCOME EARNED FROM OTHER SOURCES 'INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES' ARE TO BE ALLOWED. THE WORKING OF THE PROPORTIONATE INTEREST EXPENSES RELATABLE TO INTEREST INCOME AND HENCE ALLOWABLE U/S 57 OF THE IT ACT'61 I S AS UNDER; 5 ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 SHRI GIRISH MATLANI 1. LOAN FUND (SECURED UNSECURED) I RS. 5,85,35,630 / - 2. TOTAL FUND (CAPITAL PLUS LOAN FUND) RS. 14,55,06,447 / - 3. PERCENTAGE OF LOAN FUND TO TOTAL FUND 40.22% 4. AMOUNT GIVEN TO VARIOUS PARTIES OUT OF LOAN FUND DURING THE YEAR RS. 1,11,09,943/ - 5. PERCENTAGE OF ABOVE AMOUNT GIVEN OUT OF LOAN FUND RS 1,11,09,943 * 40.227100 = RS 44,69,406.86 6. TOTAL INTEREST FOR THE YEAR RS. 51, 86,511 / - 7. PROPORTIONATE INTEREST RELATABLE TO INTEREST INCOME FROM PARTI ES IN POINT 4 ABOVE TOTAL INTEREST X 44,69,406.86 / - LOAN FUND RS3,96,009/ - ACCORDINGLY, THE DEDUCTION U/S 57 OF THE IT ACT'61 IS COMPUTED AT RS 3,96,009 / - . 5.13 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE INTEREST INCOME FROM SONIC BIOCHEM EXTRACTIONS LTD IS COMPUTED AS UNDER: RS INTEREST INCOME 53,50,636 LESS: INTEREST EXPENSES AS PER PARA 5.12 3,96,009 LESS: BROKERAGE AS PER PARA 5.1 NIL INTEREST INCOME 49,54,627 ACCORDINGLY, RS 48,24,877 (RS 49,54,627 - RS 1,29,750), IS HEREBY ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES/PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ARE INITIATED SEPARATELY FOR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND CONCEALMENT OF INCOME. 11. UPON THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) SUMMARILY DELETED T HE ADDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 5.3 AS FAR AS THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE OF INTEREST IS CONCERNED, IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TRIED TO COMPUTE THE ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE OF INTEREST BY CONSIDERING VALUES OF VARIOUS ITEMS IN THE BALANCE S HEET ON THE CLOSING DAY OF FINANCIAL YEAR INSTEAD OF GOING IN TO THE DETAILS OF FUND FLOW EVIDENT FROM THE 6 ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 SHRI GIRISH MATLANI ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND ALSO MADE AVAILABLE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE LEDGER A CCOUNTS OF VARIOUS PARTIES FROM WHOM THE LOANS WERE RECEIVED AND ALSO SBEL THAT THERE WAS ONE TO ONE NEXUS OF FUNDS ADVANCED WITH THE BORROWED FUNDS. THE ENTIRE FUND WHICH WAS AVAILABLE TO THE APPELLANT FROM THE BORROWERS WAS SEEN TO BE ADVANCED TO SBEL DU RING THE YEAR. IN SUCH A SITUATION THERE WAS NO NEED TO DO AN EXERCISE OF COMPUTING ALLOWABLE INTEREST FROM TAKING ONLY THE CLOSING BALANCES OF VARIOUS ITEMS OF BALANCE SHEET. SUCH AN EXERCISE HAS LED TO ABSURD RESULTS. IN VIEW OF THE EXISTENCE OF ONE TO O NE NEXUS OF THE BORROWED FUNDS WITH THE MONEYS ADVANCED TO SBEL FROM WHOM THE APPELLANT HAS EARNED INTEREST INCOME THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITU RE OF INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS. 48,24,877 / - IS HEREBY DELETED . 12. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER, THE REVENUE IS IN A PPEAL BEFORE US. 13. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS . WE NOTE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING THAT THERE WAS ONE TO ONE NEXUS OF FUNDS ADVANCED WITH BORROWED FUNDS, WHICH THE A.O. HAS F A ILED TO O BSERVE. WE FIND THAT THIS LACONIC FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT ANY FACT AND FIGURE AND WITHOUT ANY REMAND FROM THE A.O. IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. HENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE REMIT THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. THE A.O. SHALL CONSIDER THE SAME AFRESH IN LIGHT OF THE LD. CIT(A)S OBSERVATION AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. APROPOS GROUND NO. 3: 12. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT D URING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PROVIDE COPY OF PER SONAL BAL ANCE SHEET AND CAPITAL ACCOUNT. VIDE ORDERSHEET NOTING DATED 05.12.2014, 18.12.2014 AND 142(1) NOTICE DATED 02.12.2014, 15.12.2014, 24.02.2015, WAS SPECIFICALLY ASKED TO PRODUCE THE SAID DETAILS. THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE NO TICES AND KEPT REQUESTING FOR ADJOURNMENT FOR PRODUCING THE SAME. SUBSEQUENTLY, VIDE ORDER SHEET NOTING DATED 12.03.2015, THE 7 ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 SHRI GIRISH MATLANI ASSESSEE'S AR WAS GIVEN A FINAL OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE SAME WERE FINALLY SUBMITTED VIDE A LETTER DATED 16.03.2013. 13. ON PERUSAL OF THE CASH BOOK (ATTACHED AS ANNEXURE - L WITH THIS ORDER), IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE A.O. THAT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE HAD CASH TRANSACTIONS AS FOLLOWS : DEBIT CREDIT CLOSING BALANCE OPENING BALANCE 155013 APRIL'11 30003.46 0.46 185013 MAY'11 30000 0 215013 JUNE'11 30193 193 245013 JULY'11 30000 0 275013 AUG'11 30000 0 305013 SEPT'11 148500 108500 345013 OCT'11 40000 0 385013 NOV'11 1737163 1737163 325013 DEC'11 40218 218 365013 JAN'12 5783100 5737 730 410383 FEB'12 48040000 48000000 450383 MARCH'12 36725956.07 37168956 10383 92820146.53 92809763.53 14. T HE A.O. OBSERVED THAT THE TRANSACTIONS W E RE NOT IN LINE WITH KNOWN SOURCES OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THAT I T WAS EQUALLY PECULIAR THAT THAT THERE WERE HUGE TRANSACTIONS IN THE MONTH OF JAN - MARCH'2012. THAT T HE TOTAL CASH INFLOW BEING RS. 9,28,20,146.53 AND OUTFLOW BEING RS . 9,28,09,763.53 FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2011 - 12. TH AT TH E ASSESSEE HAD NOT PROVIDED THE COMPLETE LEDGE ACCOUNT WITH TRANSACTION W ISE DETAILS NOR HE HAD PROVIDED ANY EXPLANATION AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FOR SAID TRANSACTIONS. ALSO, THE SAID ENTRIES WERE NOT REFLECTED IN BANK BOOK. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUITABLE EXPLANATION OR SUPPORTING EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE SAID TRANSACTION S WERE NOT FROM UNACCOUNTED SOURCES OF INCOME, SUMMONS ISSUED U/S 131 OF I.T ACT'61 DATED 20.03.2015 WERE ISSUED REQUIRING ASSESSEE'S PERSONA L ATTENDANCE. THE A.O. NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE'S AR ATTENDED ON 8 ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 SHRI GIRISH MATLANI 24.03.2015 AND REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT TILL 27.03 .2015. HOWEVER, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR THE AR ATTENDED THE HEARINGS. HENCE, THE A.O . MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. 15. UPON THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD DRAWN CE RTAIN INFERENCES BY ANALYZING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE APPELLANT FAILED TO PROVIDE EXPLANATIONS IN THIS REGARD AS PER THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE ALSO PRODUCED DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT ABLE TO APPRECIATE THE ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAINTAINED ON COMPUTER BASED ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE PACKAGE. THE APPELLANT WAS MAINTAINING BOOKS ACCOUNTS IN HIS OWN WAY USING CERTAIN SOFTWARE AND WAS ACTUALLY NOT MAINTAINING REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FOR INCOME TAX PURPOSE SINCE HE WAS NOT GETTING COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AA OF THE I.T. ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MISCONSTRUED THE ENTRIES IN THE CASH CUM JOURNAL BOOKS BY TALLYING THE SAME WITH BANK BOOK. THE APPELLANT IN HIS SUBMISSIONS HAS GIVEN REASONS FOR MAINTAINING COMBINED JOURNAL AND CASH BOOK. IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE NARRATIONS OF THE ENTRIES IN HIS CASH BOOK (CASH CUM JOURNAL BOOK) WHICH ARE TREATE D AS ENTRIES PERTAINING TO UNEXPLAINED CASH, THAT THESE ARE OF NON - CASH NATURE AND ARE ONLY JOURNAL ENTRIES PASSED BY WAY OF CONTRA ENTRIES. THUS THE OPINION FORMED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS REGARD WAS DUE TO LACK OF PROPER APPRECIATING OF THE ENTRI ES IN THE CASH CUM JOURNAL BOOK AND ASSUMPTION THAT ALL THE ENTRIES ARE OF CASH. A CAREFUL READING OF THE NARRATIONS OF THE ENTRIES OF THE CASH CUM JOURNAL BOOK IN THE LIGHT OF THE ACTUAL AFFAIRS OF THE APPELLANT WOULD NOT HAVE LEAD TO ABSURD DECISION OF A DDING ENTIRE DEBIT SIDE OF THE CASH BOOK, COVERING ALL THE TRANSACTIONS IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR. 5.5 THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE ADDITION OF RS.9,28,20,146.53 MADE U/S.68 OF THE I.T. ACT IS HEREBY DELETED. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED . 16. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 17. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE FIND THAT THE A.O. HAS MADE THE ADDITION A S IN HIS OPINION, THE BOOKS OF THE ACCOUNTS WERE NOT PROPERLY MAINTAINED. WHILE T HE LD. C IT(A) HAS GRANTED RELIEF BY HOLDING THAT THE A.O. HAS NOT 9 ITA NO. 5105/MUM/2016 SHRI GIRISH MATLANI UNDERSTOOD THE BOOK KEEPING OF THE ASSESSEE. ON A READING OF THE LD. CIT(A)S ORDER, WE ARE NOT ABLE TO COMPREHEND AS TO HOW THE LD. C IT(A) HAS GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. IF THE LD. CIT (A) WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE A.O. HAD ERRED IN UNDERSTANDIN G THE SCHEME OF ENTRY OF THE ASSESSEE , HE SHOULD HAVE CLEARLY BROUGHT ON RECORD REBUTTAL TO THE A.O.S FINDING IN HIS APPELLATE ORDER. HERE WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SUMMARILY HELD THAT TH E A.O. HAS MISCONSTRUED THE ENTRIES. THERE IS NO DESCRIPTION IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) OF HIS APPRECIATION OF ASSESSEES BOOK KEEPING. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ISSUE RAISED HERE SHOULD BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. THE A.O. IS DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE ISSUE AFRESH IN LIGHT OF THE OBSERVATIONS BY THE LD. CIT(A) AS ABOVE. 18. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COU RT ON 22.11.2018 SD/ - SD/ - ( PAWAN SINGH ) (S HAMIM YAHYA) J UDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 22.11.2018 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