ARMIN PERCY CAPTAIN, MUMBAI V. ITO 5(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 6262/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 93027 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 23-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 11-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SATISH MODI SHRI ASGHAR ZAIN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI . . , , BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K . BILLAIYA, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER / I .T.A. NO . 6262 /MUM/ 2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 - 10 MRS. ARMIN PERCY CAPTAIN, 4/5, RUSTOM BAUG, BYCULLA, MUMBAI - 400 027 / VS. THE ITO - 5(2)(2), MUMBAI ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AADPC 2950Q ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI SATISH MODI / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ASGHAR ZAIN / DATE OF HEARING : 2 3 . 0 6 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 3 .0 6 .2015 . / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 9 , MUMBAI DT. 05.07.2012 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10. 2. THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,11,36,236/ - ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN THE INCOME APPEARING IN FORM 26AS AND THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA. NO. 6262/M/2012 2 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A SERVICE PROVIDER. THE RETURN FOR THE YEAR WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND ACCORDINGLY STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. WHILE SCRUTINIZING THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE AS SESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS AS SHOWN IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND AS PER THE AIR INFORMATION, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE RE CEIPTS. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, THE AO PROCEEDED BY MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,11,36,236/ - BEING THE DIFFERENCE AS PER ASSESSEES STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT AND DETAILS GIVEN IN FORM 26AS. 4. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BE FORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAVE FAILED TO UNDERSTAND THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT FILED DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AN D ALSO BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. ONCE AGAIN THE LD. COUNSEL FILED THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT BEFORE US. 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL. THE RECONCILIATION FUR NISHED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY APPRECIATED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE CAREFULLY THE RECONCILIATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA. NO. 6262/M/2012 3 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE . OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 2 3 RD JUNE , 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( I.P. BANSAL ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 2 3 RD JUNE , 2015 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI