RENUKA A MAROO, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 24(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 5464/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 546419914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 12-04-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 06-07-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C G K NAIR
• Keywords: Business income; Additional evidence
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH D , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.5464/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 MRS. RENUKA A. MAROO B-1201, ANMOL CHSL PATEL PETROL PUMP, S.V. RD. GOREGAON(W) MUMBAI-400 062. PAN NO. AAJPM 6941 R INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 24(3)(4) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.4964/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER MUMBAI. MRS. RENUKA A. MAROO MUMBAI-400 062. (APPELLANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI K. GOPAL DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI C.G.K. NAIR DATE OF HEARING : 27.6.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 6.7.2012 O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH, AM: THESE CROSS APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.3.2010 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. TH ESE ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY A SINGLE CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 2 THE DISPUTES RAISED IN THESE APPEALS RELATE TO ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN BANKS, ON ACCOUNT OF LOANS, ON ACCOUNT OF MONEY RECEIVED FROM SHARE BROKER AND NATURE OF INCOME FROM SH ARE TRANSACTIONS. 2. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE WHO WAS ENGAGED IN WEDDING CARD BUSINESS HAD DECLARED TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3,10,290/- F OR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. THE AO DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS OBTAINED THE BANK STATEMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE RELE VANT YEAR FROM BHARAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND NORTH KANARA GSP CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED. HE NOTED FROM THE STATEMENTS THAT THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.12,00,592/- AND CHEQUE DEPOSITS/ECS CLEARI NG OF RS.11,09,979/- AGGREGATING TO RS.23,10,571/- IN THE N ORTH KANARA BANK. SIMILARLY, THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.2,90,775/- AND CHEQUE/ECS CLEARING OF RS.20,80,129/- AGGREGATING TO R S.23,70,904/- IN THE BHARAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK. THERE WERE THUS TOT AL DEPOSITS OF RS.46,81,475/- IN THE TWO BANK ACCOUNTS, WHEREAS THE ASSESSE E HAD ONLY GROSS INCOME OF RS.1,45,686/- FROM WEDDING CARDS SALE S, CONSULTANCY CHARGES OF RS.4,32,352/-, DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS.1,28,191/- AND INTEREST INCOME OF RS.11,253/- AGGREGATING TO RS.7, 17,478/-. THE AO, THEREFORE ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSITS. HOWEVER, AS PER AO, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT GIVE SATISFACTORY ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 3 EXPLANATION WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. HE, THEREFORE M ADE ADDITION OF RS.46,81,475/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 3. IN APPEAL THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE DETAILS OF DEPOS ITS IN THE TWO BANK ACCOUNTS AS UNDER :- S.NO. PARTICULARS BHARAT CO-OP. NKGSB TOTAL(IN RS.) 1. CASH DEPOSIT 316,850.00 1,302,700.00 1,619,550.00 2. SURESH RATHI SEC. P. LTD. 624,719.00 336,243.77 960,962.77 3. KEDIA SHARES SHRIDHAR BIYANI 895,971.00 - 895,971.00 4. LOAN 67,000.00 155,000.00 222,000.00 5. NITIN BHATTAD- LOAN 55,000.00 100,000.00 155,000.00 6. MANOJ SABOO- LOAN - 100,000.00 100,000.00 7. MISC. DEPOSIT 69,849.36 87,698.54 157,547.90 8. DIVIDEND 278,477.61 105,967.39 384,445.00 9. CONTRA DEPOSIT - 95,500.00 95,500.00 10. SALE OF CARDS 59,290.00 19,862.00 79,152.00 11. CHQ. RETURN - 6,700.00 6,700.00 12. BANK INTEREST - 420.00 420.00 2,367,156.97 2,310,,091.70 4,677,248.67 3.1 THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT SOURCE OF THE CASH DEPOSITS O F RS.16,19,550/- IN THE TWO BANK ACCOUNTS WAS GROSS RECEIPTS O F RS.7,17,478/- DURING THE YEAR AND CASH WITHDRAWAL OF R S.7,15,800/- FROM BHARAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND RS.3,54,650/- FROM NORTH KANARA BANK GSB. THE OTHER DEPOSITS, IT WAS POINTED OUT, WERE THROUGH CHEQUE ON VARIOUS ACCOUNTS SUCH AS RECEIPT FROM SHARE BROKERS, LOANS, DIVIDEND, SALE OF CARD ETC. AS MENTIONED IN THE TABLE A BOVE. THE DIVIDEND HAD BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE SHARES HELD BY THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 4 3.2 CIT(A) REMANDED THE MATTER TO THE AO FOR SUBMISSIO N OF REPORT AFTER EXAMINATION OF DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. T HE AO IN THE REMAND REPORT DATED 5.3.2010 OBJECTED TO THE ADDITIO NAL EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN PROVIDED SEVERAL OPPORT UNITIES BUT HAD NOT GIVEN THE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES. THE AO, HOW EVER, GAVE HIS REPORT ON THE VARIOUS FACTUAL POSITION MENTIONED IN T HE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE. IN RELATION TO CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.16,19,550/- THE AO SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEP OSIT AS UNDER :- I) CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM BHARAT CO-OP. BANK RS.7,15,8 00/- II) CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM NORTH KARANA GSB RS.3,54,65 0/- III) SALE OF WEDDING CARDS RS. 1,45,686/- IV) CONSULTANCY CHARGES RS.4,32,352/- TOTAL .. . . RS.16,48,488/- 3.3 THE AO POINTED OUT THAT OUT OF SALES OF WEDDING CA RDS OF RS.1,45,686/-, A SUM OF RS.79,192/- WAS BY CHEQUE AS WAS CL EARLY MENTIONED IN THE TABLE EARLIER. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE HA D INCURRED CASH EXPENSES OF RS.1,57,752/- ON SALARY, CONVEYANCE, LEGAL CHA RGES, DRAWINGS AND PAYMENT TO CREDITORS ETC. THE AO ALSO POIN TED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD WITHDRAWN CASH TO THE TUNE OF RS.2,40,000 /- ON 23.3.2006 AND RS.59,500/- ON 24.3.2006 FROM BHARAT C O-OP. BANK LTD. TOTALING TO RS.2,99,500/-. THERE WAS NO CASH DEPOSIT IN THE SAID BANK ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 5 ACCOUNT AFTER 24.3.2006. AS REGARDS NORTH KANARA BANK, THERE WAS CASH WITHDRAWAL OF RS.5,000/- ON 24.3.2006 AND THEREAFTER THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.39,750/- IN THAT BANK ACCOUNT AND CASH EXPE NDITURE OF RS.32,615/-. THUS ON 24.3.2006 THERE WAS TOTAL CASH WITH DRAWAL FROM THE TWO ACCOUNTS OF RS.3,04,500/- AND DEPOSITS WERE OF RS. 39,750/- AND RS.32,675/-. THUS AS ON 31.3.2006, THERE WAS CASH BAL ANCE OF RS.2,32,075/- (304500 39750 -32675). FURTHER, AS PE R CASH BOOK THERE WAS CASH IN HAND OF RS.23,302/- AS ON 31.3.2006. T HUS, TOTAL CASH IN HAND AS ON 31.3.2006 WAS RS . 2,55,377/-. 3.4 THE AO, THEREFORE, IN THE REMAND REPORT DETERMI NED THE UNEXPLAINED CASH OF RS.463,343/- AS PER DETAILED COMPUTA TION GIVEN BELOW :- 1. CASH WITHDRAWAL FORM BHARAT CO-OP. BANK 715800 2. CASH WITHDRAWAL FROM NKGSB 354650 3. CONSULTANCY CHARGES 432352 4. SALES OF WEDDING CARDS (TABLE B) 145686 LESS SALE OF CARDS IN CHEQUE (TABLE A) 79152 66534 SUB TOTAL 15,69,336 LESS: 1. CASH EXPENSES (DISCUSSED ABOVE) 1,57,752 2. CASH IN HAND (DISCUSSED ABOVE) 2,55,377 4,13,129 CASH AVAILABLE FOR THE ASSESSEE TO DEPOSIT IN BANKS 11,56,207 UNEXPLAINED CASH (1619550 1156207) 4,63,343 ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 6 3.5 IN RELATION TO RECEIPT OF RS.9,60,962.77 FROM M/S. SURESH RATHI SECURITIES PVT. LTD., THE AO MENTIONED IN THE REMAND REPORT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN TOTAL RECEIPT OF RS.42,15,343.94 FROM T HE SAID BROKER AND THEREFORE, THE SUM OF RS.9,60,962.77 DEPOSI TED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS EXPLAINED. HOWEVER, THE CLAIM OF SHORT TERM CA PITAL GAIN OF RS.1,48,175/- AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.39,67,1 60/- FROM SALE OF SHARES WAS NOT VERIFIABLE IN THE ABSENCE OF DATE OF PUR CHASE OF SHARES AND PRICE AT WHICH SHARES HAD BEEN PURCHASED ETC. THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN ONLY COMMON DATE OF PURCHASE OF 31.3.2004. THE AO THEREFORE OBSERVED THAT PROFIT ON SALE OF SHARES CAN NOT BE ASCERTAI NED. THE AO ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CARRYING ON VOLUMINOUS SHARE TRANSACTIONS. THE ASSESSEE HAD DEALT IN MORE THAN 283 SCRIPS. THE AO, THEREFORE, CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS TRADING IN SHAR ES AND ACCORDINGLY REPORTED THAT THE INCOME FROM SALE AND PURCH ASE OF SHARES SHOULD BE TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME. 3.6 AS REGARDS, THE RECEIPT OF RS.8,95,971/- FROM KEDIA SHARES & STOCK BROKERS LTD., THE AO OBSERVED IN THE REMAND REP ORT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED ONLY LEDGER EXTRACT FOR THE YEAR A ND NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE WAS FURNISHED FOR THE RECEIPT. THE BROKER HAD CREDITED THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE ON 16.3.2006 BY RS.8,95,97 1/- AND ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 7 THEREAFTER DEBITED THE ACCOUNT ON 20.3.2006 BY THE SAM E AMOUNT. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH THE DETAILS AND EVIDENCE REGARDI NG NATURE OF CREDIT AND THEREFORE GENUINENESS OF CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE W AS NOT VERIFIABLE. 3.7 IN RELATION TO LOANS, THE AO REPORTED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD SHOWN RECEIPT OF RS.2,22,000/- FROM SHRIDHAR BIYANI WHICH WA S REPAID DURING THE YEAR. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH COPIES OF INCOME TA X RETURN, P.A. NUMBER ETC. OF THE CREDITOR AND THEREFORE THE GE NUINENESS WAS NOT VERIFIABLE. SIMILARLY, FROM NITIN BHATTAD, THE TOT AL RECEIVABLE DURING THE YEAR INCLUDING OPENING BALANCE WAS RS.3,26,242/- OUT O F WHICH A SUM OF RS.1,55,000/- HAD BEEN RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR A ND, THEREFORE, RECEIVABLE AT THE END OF THE YEAR WAS RS.1,71,242.94 B UT NO SUCH BALANCE WAS REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO NOT SUBMITTED ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR VERIFICATION OF THE CLAIM. IN CASE OF MANOJ SABOO, THERE WAS OPENING BALANCE OF RS.75, 000/- AND DURING THE YEAR ASSESSEE RECEIVED AMOUNT OF RS.1,00,000/- AND THEREFORE, CLOSING BALANCE AT THE END OF THE YEAR SHOUL D HAVE BEEN RS.1,75,000/- BUT THE BALANCE REFLECTED IN THE CLOSING B ALANCE WAS ONLY RS.55,000/- 4. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO AGREED THAT SOURCE OF CASH OF RS.463,343/- WAS NOT EXPLAINED AND ACCORD INGLY ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 8 CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE AMO UNT OF RS.8,95,971/- CLAIMED TO BE RECEIVED FROM KEDIA SHARES & STOCK BROKERS LTD. IN THE ABSENCE OF CONTRACT NOTE, DEMAT ACCOU NT ETC. IN REGARD TO LOANS FROM SHRIDHAR BIYANI, NITIN BHATTAD AND MANOJ SABOO CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THESE WERE EMPLOYEES AND RELATIVE S OF ASSESSEE BUT ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH EVIDENCE OF THEIR CREDIT W ORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS BY GIVING P.A. NUMBERS. ETC. IT WAS ALSO OBSERVED BY HIM THAT MERE FILING OF CONFIRMATION WAS N OT ENOUGH. HE, THEREFORE, CONFIRMED THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN. AS REGARDS THE CAPITAL GAIN FROM SALE OF SHARES THROUGH SURESH RATHI SE CURITIES PVT. LTD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN SHORT TE RM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.1,48,175/- AND RS.39,67,160/- AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN COULD NOT BE ASSESSED AS BUSINESS INCOME AS HOLDING PERIOD WAS MORE THAT ONE YEAR. HE ACCORDINGLY HELD THAT CLAIM OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN SH OULD BE ACCEPTED. 4.1 AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF CIT(A) BOTH THE PART IES ARE IN APPEAL. WHEREAS THE DEPARTMENT HAS DISPUTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN RELATION TO ACCEPTANCE OF THE CLAIM OF LONG TERM CAPIT AL GAIN, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION ON ACCO UNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH, ON ACCOUNT OF LOANS AND ON ACCOUNT OF R ECEIPT FROM KEDIA SHARES. ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 9 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. AR AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS DURING REMAND PROCEEDINGS COULD NOT SUBMIT COMPLETE DETAILS REGARDING PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES, GIVING NAME OF SCRIPS, HOLDING PERIOD ETC. AS ALL RELEVANT RECORDS WERE WASHED AWAY IN UNPRECEDENTED RAINS ON 26.7 .2005. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT ASSESSEE HAD SINCE OBTAINED DETAILS FRO M STOCK HOLDING CORPORATION. THE TRANSACTION DETAILS OBTAINED FROM ST OCK HOLDING CORPORATION WERE PLACED AT PAGE 94-140 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO OBTAINED CONTRACT NOTES FROM KDR SHARES AND CONFIRMATION OF ACCOUNTS ETC. WHICH HAVE BEEN PLACED AT PAGES 141 TO 146 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND TRANSACTION DETAILS AT PAGES 141 TO 188 OF THE PAPER BOOK. IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE SAME MA Y BE ACCEPTED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. IT HA S ALSO BEEN POINTED OUT THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 ALSO, SIMILAR ADDITIO NAL EVIDENCES HAD BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAD BEEN ADMITTED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ORDER DATED 29.7.2011 IN ITA NO.5463/MU M/2010. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE RELATING TO UNEXPLAIN ED CASH AND LOANS SHOULD ALSO BE SENT BACK TO CIT(A) AS THESE ALSO HAD NOT B EEN PROPERLY EXAMINED WITH FULL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5.1 THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE MATTER WAS REMANDED TO THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH EXAMINATI ON. ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 10 6. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS AND CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS CAREFULLY. THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE WEDDING CARD B USINESS HAD ALSO PURCHASED AND SOLD SHARES. THE AO NOTED THAT GROSS RECE IPTS OF THE ASSESSEE FROM WEDDING CARD BUSINESS, CONSULTANCY CHARGES, INT EREST AND DIVIDEND ETC. WERE TO THE TUNE OF RS.7,17,478/- B UT THERE WERE DEPOSIT OF RS.46,81,475/- IN THE TOW BANK ACCOUNTS OF TH E ASSESSEE WHICH WERE NOT EXPLAINED SATISFACTORILY. THE AO, THERE FORE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.46,81,475/-. DURING THE APPELLATE PR OCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED DETAILS OF DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS WH ICH HAVE BEEN REPRODUCED IN PARA-3 OF THIS ORDER. THE DEPOSITS O F RS.9,60,962.77 AND RS.8,91,971/- ARE ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE TRANSACTION WI TH SURESH RATHI SECURITIES PVT. LTD. AND KEDIA SHARES RESPECTIVEL Y. AFTER DETAILED EXAMINATION DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT THERE WAS TOTAL RECEIPT OF RS.4,21,53,343 .94 FROM SURESH RATHI SECURITIES OUT OF WHICH A SUM OF RS.1,48,175/- WA S SHOWN BY ASSESSEE AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND RS.39,67,160/- AS LO NG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT GIVEN DETAILS AND EVIDENCE REGARDING DATE OF PURCHASE, PURCHASE PRICE ETC., AND ALSO TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ENTERED INTO VOLUMINOUS T RANSACTIONS IN LARGE NUMBERS OF SCRIPS, THE AO TREATED CAPITAL GAIN AS B USINESS INCOME. CIT(A) HAS ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF LONG TERM CAPIT AL GAIN WHICH HAS BEEN CHALLENGED BY THE DEPARTMENT. SIMILARLY IN RESPECT OF RECEIPT ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 11 OF RS.8,91,971/- FROM KEDIA SHARES, NO DETAILS AND EV IDENCE HAD BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE REGARDING NATURE OF RECEOPT EXCE PT COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT AND THEREFORE, SOURCE OF THESE RECEIPT HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO AND CIT(A). THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS T HAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH DETAILS AND EVIDENCE IN RELATIO N TO SHARES AS DOCUMENTS WERE LOST IN THE UNPRECEDENTED FLOODS ON 26.7. 2005. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW OBTAINED TRANSACTION DETAILS THROUGH STOCK HOLDING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND CONTRACT NOTES OF THE BR OKERS, ETC. AND HAS REQUESTED THE SAME TO BE ADMITTED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE. WE FIND THE SAME PROBLEM HAD CROPPED UP IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 I N WHICH THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 29/7/2011 IN ITA NO.5463/ M/2010 HAD ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE INTEREST OF J USTICE AND RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, AD MIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES THIS YEAR ALSO. IN OUR VIEW ONLY AFTER DETAIL ED EXAMINATION OF THESE EVIDENCES ANY CONCLUSION CAN BE REACHED REGARDING AD DITION ON ACCOUNT OF KEDIA SHARES AND REGARDING NATURE OF INCOME F ROM PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES. THE MATTER IS THUS RESTORED TO CIT(A ). 5.1 AS REGARDS THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED C ASH OF RS.4,63,343/- AND ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LOANS, WE FIND THAT AFTER REMAND REPORT OF AO, CIT(A) HAD NOT GIVEN ANY SPECIF IC OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE . IN RELATION TO CASH EXPENSES, AO HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT CASH AS ON 24.3.2006 WAS RS.2,32,075/- BUT IN THE CASH BO OK ON ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 12 31.3.2006 CASH WAS ONLY RS.23,302/-. IT IS THEREFORE, R EQUIRED TO BE EXAMINED WHETHER THE BALANCE CASH AS ON 24.3.2006 HAD B EEN USED TO MEET THE CASH EXPENSES OF RS.1,57,752/-. REGARDING LOANS ALSO, CIT(A) MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS NO P.A. NO. IN THE CONFIRMAT IONS OF SHRI SHRIDHAR BIYANI BUT HE HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF ALL THREE LOANS WITHOUT MENTIONING WHETHER OTHER LOANS WERE ALSO NOT SUPPORTED BY CONFIRMATIONS AND WITH P.A. NO. THEREFORE, IN OUR VIEW, THE ISSUE OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED CASH AND LOANS ALSO REQU IRES FRESH EXAMINATION AT THE LEVEL OF CIT(A). WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE DISPUTE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BA CK TO HIM FOR PASSING A FRESH ORDER AFTER ALLOWING PROPER OPPORTUNIT Y OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6.7.2012. SD/- SD/- (D. MANMOHAN ) VICE PRESIDENT (RAJENDRA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 6.7.2012. JV. ITA NO.5464/M/10 & 4964/M/10 A.Y.06-07 13 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.