Bijay Kumar Mandhani, Hyd, Hyderabad V. DCIT, Central Circle-1(3), Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 605/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 60522514 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 12-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: E SUNIL BABU
• Assessee Lawyers: B SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.605/HYD/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06) SHRI BIJAY KUMAR MANDHANI, HYDERABAD (PAN - ABTPM 9807 B ) V/S DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI B.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY RESPONDENT BY : SHRI E. SUNIL BABU DATE OF HEARING 12.11.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30.11.2015 O R D E R PER P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. IN THIS APPEAL, ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A) IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.10 LAKHS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER IN RESPECT OF UNSECURED LOANS TAKEN FROM M/S. GORBAND HOTEL & RESORTS PVT. LTD. BY WAY OF AN ADDITIONAL GROUND, THE ASSESSEE IS CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN NOT ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE TITS CLAIM. AS ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST NO N-ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PERTAINING TO THE ISSUE ON RECORD, WE ADMI T THE ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL AND PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE , AN INDIVIDUAL, IS THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF M/S. MAHESHWARI BROTHERS COAL LTD. AND MANAGING PARTNER OF M/S. MAHESWARI BROTHERS. THERE WAS A SEA RCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION UNDER S.132 OF THE ACT IN THE CASE OF M/S. MAHESHWA RI BROTHERS AND ALSO THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 8.9.2010. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, CERTAIN INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND AND SEIZED. DURING THE ASSESSMENT ITA NO.605/HYD/2015 SHRI BIJAY KUMAR MANDHANI, HYDERABAD 2 PROCEEDINGS UNDER S.143(3) READ WITH S.153A OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TO HAVE RECEIVE D A LOAN OF RS.10 LAKHS FROM M/S.GORBAND HOTEL & RESORTS PVT. LTD. ASSESS EE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE SAID LOAN SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS UNEXP LAINED CASH CREDIT AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY AND CREDI T-WORTHINESS OF THE ALLEGED CREDITOR AND PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTI ON. ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE CONFIRMATION LETTER OF THE CREDITOR BEFORE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER AND DUE TO THE SAME, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE LOAN AS UNE XPLAINED AND ACCORDINGLY MADE ADDITION UNDER S.68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 196 1. 3. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BE FORE THE CIT(A) AND ALSO FILED A LETTER SEEKING ADMISSION OF THE CONFIR MATION LETTER OF CREDITOR STATING THAT THE LOAN WAS ADVANCED BY WAY OF AN AC COUNT PAYEE CHEQUE ALONGWITH THE PHOTO-COPIES OF THE STATEMENT OF ACC OUNT OF M/S.GORBAND HOTEL & RESORTS PVT. LTD. IN KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD. AS AD DITIONAL EVIDENCE. THE CIT(A), HOWEVER, DID NOT ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVID ENCE AND PROCEEDED TO CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THA T THE LOAN WAS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQU E AND IS REFLECTED IN THE ASSESSEES BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, AND THEREFORE, IT CANN OT BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED UNSECURED LOAN. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE EVIDENCE PRODUCED BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS ONLY TO PROVE THIS FACT AND THE CIT( A) HAS ERRED IN NOT ADMITTING AND CONSIDERING THE SAME. HE, THEREFORE , PRAYED FOR REMAND OF THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERI FICATION OF THE EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. ITA NO.605/HYD/2015 SHRI BIJAY KUMAR MANDHANI, HYDERABAD 3 6. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE FIN D THAT THE EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) IN RELATIO N TO THE LONE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NECESSARY EVIDENCE TO DECIDE THE ISSUE. THEREFORE, WE ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AND REM IT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION OF THE SAME AND TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE, A FA IR OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 7. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 SD/- SD/- (B.RAMAKOTAIAH) (P.MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. JUDICIAL MEMBER DT/- 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI BIJAY KUMAR MANDHANI, C/O. M/S. VENUGOPAL & CHENOY, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, DOOR NO.4-1-889/167/2, TILA K ROAD, HYDERABAD 500 001. 2. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), HYDERABAD 3. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS), CENTRAL, HYDER ABAD COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX , CENTRAL , HYDERABAD 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ITAT, HYDERABAD B.V.S.