ROHIT MOHIT CONSTRUCTION, MUMBAI V. ACIT 24(3), MUMBAI

ITA 6013/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 48477 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS VANDANA SAGAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES D : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. NO. 6013/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-2004 ROHIT MOHIT CONSTRUCTION CORPN. MUMBAI 400 063 PAN AACFR7258R VS. ACIT 24 (3) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR APPELLANT : -NONE- FOR RESPONDENT : MRS. VANDANA SAGAR (DR) ORDER PER D. MANMOHAN, V.P. 1. LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271 (1) (C) OF TH E ACT WITH RESPECT TO THE ADDITION OF RS.10,94,094/- IS THE SU BJECT MATTER OF DISPUTE BEFORE US. 2. APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED FROM TIME TO TIME AT THE R EQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE AND FINALLY THE CASE WAS POSTED FOR HE ARING ON 18/4/2011. HOWEVER, ON THIS DATE NONE APPEARED ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL EXPARTE, QUA THE ASSESSEE, SINCE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. WE HAVE HEARD TH E LEARNED DR AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RECORD. 3. FACTS IN SHORT ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE-FIRM IS EN GAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CIVIL CONSTRUCTION. IN RESPECT OF THE P REVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-2004 ASSESSEE DECLARED TOTAL INCOME OF RS.5,82,410/-. THOUGH THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS ORIG INALLY PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143 (1) OF THE ACT, THE SAME WAS TAKE N-UP FOR SCRUTINY AT A LATER STAGE AND ACCORDINGLY NOTICES WERE ISSUE D UNDER SECTIONS 143 (2) AND 142 (1) OF THE ACT, IN RESPONSE TO WHIC H, ASSESSEE 2 FURNISHED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ETC., WHICH WERE TEST C HECKED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ON A CLOSE EXAMINATION, THE ASSE SSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE BOOKS CONTAIN SEVERAL CASH CREDITS WITH IDENTICAL CREDIT BALANCES FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS. IN ORDER TO CROSS-VERIFY AS TO WHETHER ANY CREDITORS ARE GENUINE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICES UNDER SECTION 133 (6) OF THE ACT MOST OF WHICH WERE RETURNED UN- SERVED WITH THE POSTAL REMARK NOT KNOWN. WHEN THE SAME WAS PUT TO THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE-FIRM THAT SOME OF THEM ARE MIGRANT LABOUR AND IT IS DIFFICULT TO CONTACT ALL THE PARTIES BUT FURNISHED CERTAIN SKELETAL DETAILS SUCH AS TELEPHONE NUMBERS ETC., ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PRODUCED CONFIRMATI ONS IN RESPECT OF THREE CREDITS TOTALLING TO RS.7,18,348/- OUT OF RS. 18,12,442/-. IN OTHERWORDS, FOR THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.10,94,094/ - INITIAL ONUS OF PROVING THE GENUINENESS HAVING NOT BEEN DISCHARGED BY THE ASSESSEE, A SUM OF RS.10,94,094/- WAS ADDED BACK TO THE INCOM E RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE. CONSEQUENT THERETO, PENALTY WAS LEVIE D UNDER SECTION 271 (1) (C) OF THE ACT. IT MAY BE NOTICED THAT EVEN DURING THE COURSE OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND NO EXPLANATION WHATSOEVER WAS FURNISHED ON BEHALF OF T HE ASSESSEE. 4. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHEREIN IT WAS CONTENDED THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNIT Y WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE CR EDITORS. LEARNED CIT(A) REJECTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE BY S TATING THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND IN THE AB SENCE OF ESTABLISHING THE CREDITWORTHINESS, ASSESSING OFFICE R IS JUSTIFIED IN IMPOSING PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271 (1) (C) OF THE A CT. 5. FURTHER AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND NO MATERIAL WHATSOEVER WAS FURNISHED TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS AND CREDITWO RTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. RECORD ALSO INDICATES THAT SUFFICIENT OP PORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS NOT UTILISED TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS PLACED UPON THE ASSESSEE-FIRM. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE DO NOT FIND 3 ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AN D ACCORDINGLY DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AS ANNOUN CED IN THE OPEN COURT. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18-4-2011. SD/- SD/- (T.R. SOOD) (D.MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT MUMBAI, DATE 18 TH APRIL, 2011 VBP/- COPY TO 1. ROHIT MOHIT CONSTRUCTION CORPN. 24, YASHODHAM SH OPPING CENTRE, FILM CITY ROAD, GOREGAON (EAST), MUMBAI 400 0 63 PAN AACFR7258R 2. ACIT 24 (3), MUMBAI. 3. CIT(A)-XXIV, C.-10, R.NO.709, PRATYAKSHA KAR BHA VAN, BANDRA- KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI 400 051. 4. CIT-24, MUMBAI 5. DR D BENCH 6. GUARD FILE (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI.