NEETA P. KAPADIA, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 16(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 5619/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9332 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROOPAK KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: K P KAPADIA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, . . , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC , BENCH MUMBAI .. , BEFORE SHRI R.K.GUPTA, JM ./ ITA NO.5619/MUM/2011 ( ! ! ! ! '#! '#! '#! '#! / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2006-2007) MS. NEETA P. KAPADIA, FLAT NO.20, 5 TH FLOOR, 12 CHAMAN BUILDING, SLEATER ROAD, GRANT ROAD (W), MUMBAI-400 007 VS. ITO WD 16(3)(3), MUMBAI-07 $ % ./ &' ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AJVPK 3905 D ( $( / APPELLANT ) .. ( )*$( / RESPONDENT ) !+, - -- - . . . . /ASSESSEE BY : MR. K.P.KAPADIA &' - -- - . . . . /REVENUE BY : MR. ROOPAK KUMAR ' - ,/% / DATE OF HEARING : 21 ST NOV., 2012 01# - ,/% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 RD NOV.,2012 2 2 2 2 / O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17-02- 2011 OF LEANED CIT(A)-27, MUMBAI RELATING TO THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THIS APPEAL IS FILED LATE BY 8 DAYS. CONDONATION A PPLICATION IS ON RECORD. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS MENTIONED IN TH E APPLICATION, I FOUND THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR DELAY OF 8 DA YS IN FILING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IS ALLOWED AND DELAY OF 8 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL IS HEREBY CONDONED. ITA NO.5619/2011 2 3 . THE ONLY ISSUE IN APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAIN ST CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.65,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF LOW HOUSE HOLD WITHDRAWALS. 4. THE ASSESSEE IS AN UNMARRIED LADY, WHO IS DOING TH E BUSINESS OF FINANCING IN THE NAME OF KAPADIA & CO. WITH THE H ELP OF HER FATHER AND OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS. SHE HAS NOT SHOWN ANY WITHDRA WAL FOR HER HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE, THAT HER FATHER AND OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS CONTRIBUTE THE HOUSEHOLD E XPENSES, THEREFORE SHE HAS NOT SHOWN ANY WITHDRAWAL, WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.65,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF NO WITHDRAWAL SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR HER HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. 5 . BEFORE THE CIT(A), SAME CONTENTIONS WERE REITERAT ED AND DETAILS OF WITHDRAWALS BY THE FAMILY AT RS.2,16,000/- WERE FILED, HOWEVER, THE CIT(A) WAS ALSO NOT SATISFIED, THEREFORE, HE CONFIR MED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NOW, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL H ERE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6 . AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL PARTIES, I FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO SUCCEED ON THE ISSUE INVOLVED. I NOTED THAT THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, WHO WAS HEAD OF THE FAMILY, WAS CONTRIBUT ING HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. THE ASSESSEE HAS STARTED HER SMALL BUSINE SS OF FINANCING WITH THE HELP OF HER FATHER, THEREFORE, IN MY CONSI DERED VIEW, NO ADVERSE INFERENCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DRAWN IN THE CAS E OF THE ASSESSEE. IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT SATISFIE D WITH THE WITHDRAWALS SHOWN BY THE FAMILY OF THE ASSESSEE, TH EN IF ANY ADVERSE ITA NO.5619/2011 3 ACTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEE N TAKEN IN THE HANDS OF THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, WHO WAS HEAD O F THE FAMILY. IT WAS ALSO STATED BY THE BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE, SHRI K. P.KAPADIA, WHO APPEARED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE WITHDRAWAL SH OWN BY THE FAMILY HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN SUBSE QUENT YEAR WHILE PASSING THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, FOR THIS REASON ALSO, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT NO ADVERSE INFER ENCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DRAWN AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 7 . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE, I DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.65,000/- MADE AND CONFIRMED BY T HE LOWER AUTHORITIES. I ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. + ,3 !+, - '4, - &, 56 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 23 RD DAY OF NOV.2012. 2 - 01# % 7 8 3 23RD NOV.,2012 1 - SD/- ( . . ) (R.K.GUPTA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; 8 DATED : 23 RD NOV./ 2012 . ). . /PKM , . / PS 2 2 2 2 - -- - ),9 ),9 ),9 ),9 :9#, :9#, :9#, :9#, / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $( / THE APPELLANT 2. )*$( / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ; ( ) / THE CIT(A)-X, MUMBAI. 4. ; / CIT 5. 9'< ), , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. =! > / GUARD FILE. *9, ), //TRUE COPY// 2 2 2 2 / BY ORDER, ? ?? ? / 5 5 5 5 & & & & ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI