ADDL.C.I.T.6(1), MUMBAI V. BRIGHT BROTHERS LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 6305/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 630519914 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 15-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Search and seizure

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2608/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, PAWAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, 2 ND FLOOR, EDULJI ROAD, CHARAI, THANE (W) / VS. M/S MOHAN VELJI PATEL, C/O- ASHIT MEHTA, FLAT NO.11, A WINGH, 5 TH FLOOR, KEVAL MAHAL, NETAJI SUBHASH ROAD, 64 MARINE DRIVE, MUMBAI-400020 ( / REVENUE) ( !' # /ASSESSEE) P.A. NO. AAAPP9127H / REVENUE BY SHRI N.P.SINGH CIT-DR !' # / ASSESSEE BY SHRI GYANESHWAR KATARAM $ % & # ' / DATE OF HEARING : 30/06/2015 & # ' / DATE OF ORDER: 04/08/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DAT ED 31/12/2010 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL PERTAINS TO TH E MOHAN VELJI PATEL ITA NO.2608/MUM/2011 2 ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED CASH FOUND AND SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SUCH INCOME WAS FROM ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, THE LD. CIT-DR, SHRI N.P. SINGH, SUPPORTED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY CONTENDING THAT THE ADDITION W AS RIGHTLY MADE AND THE STATEMENT WAS RECORDED. THE S ON OF THE ASSESSEE FILED RECONCILIATION LETTER AFTER FOUR DAYS. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI GYANESHWAR KATARAM, LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE, DEFENDED THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACTS , IN BRIEF, ARE THAT A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION WAS CARRIED OUT ON 17/01/2008, AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,81,44,112/-. THE ASSESSEE WAS FOUND TO BE OWNE R OF TWO RESIDENTIAL HOUSING PROPERTY ONE AT GHATKOPAR A ND REMAINING ONE AT BHAVESHWAR NIWAS. AS PER THE REVE NUE, NO INCOME WAS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THESE PROPERTIES. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE PROPERTY AT GHATKOPAR WAS SELF OCCUPIED, WHEREAS, THE BHAVES HWAR NIWAS WAS NOT LET OUT. ON ENQUIRY, IT WAS FOUND TH AT THE PROPERTY AT BHAVESHWAR NIWAS WAS PARTLY LET OUT AND THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE PROPERTY WAS SELF OCCUPIED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED THE NOTIONAL INCOME FROM THE PROP ERTY AT MOHAN VELJI PATEL ITA NO.2608/MUM/2011 3 THE RATE OF 12,000/- PER ANNUM AND THE NET INCOME W AS BROUGHT TO THE TAX. 2.1. DURING SEARCH AN AMOUNT OF RS.35,76,660/- WAS FOUND IN CASH. OUT OF WHICH, THE AMOUNT OF RS.27,67 ,240/- WAS FOUND FROM THE BEDROOM OF THE ASSESSEE. THE STATEMENT U/S 132(4) WAS RECORDED FROM THE SON OF T HE ASSESSEE, NAMELY, SHRI MUKESH PATEL. IT WAS TENDER ED BY HIM THAT IT BELONGED TO VARIOUS CONCERN OF THE FAMI LY AS HAS BEEN MENTION IN PARA 7.1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. AS PER THE REVENUE, NO EVIDENCE WAS FURNISHED IN SUPPORT OF TH E CLAIM. THUS, RS.33 LAKH WAS SEIZED. THE ASSESSEE FU RNISHED THE RECONCILIATION OF THE CASH FOUND BY THE INVESTI GATION WING. SAME EXPLANATION WAS FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASS ESSING OFFICER, HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED THE S AME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 14/08/2009, ADDRESSED TO ASSESSING OFFICER, DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, EXPLAINED THE SOURCE TO BE CASH BALANCE, AVAILABLE IN THE BOOKS OF THE FAMILY CONCE RNS. IT WAS CLAIMED THAT RS.27,67,340/- BELONGS TO HIM AND HIS WIFE AND RS.4,09,420/- TO HIS SON MUKESH PATEL AND HIS WIFE AND RS.4 LAKH TO OTHER SON NIRAJ PATEL AND HIS WIFE. THE RELEVANT SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN DULY RECORDED IN PARA 7.3 ONWARDS OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THEREFORE, THE S AME IS NOT BEING REPEATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY AS THE S AME IS A MATTER OF RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE STATEMEN T TENDERED BY SHRI MUKESH PATEL AND MORE SPECIFICALLY QUESTION NO. 13. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DULY EXAMINED THE CASH BOOK OF THE ASSESS EE AND MOHAN VELJI PATEL ITA NO.2608/MUM/2011 4 FOUND THAT THE ENTIRE CASH BALANCE OF RS.35,76,660/ - WAS REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY, NEITHER THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER NOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER QUESTIONED THE VERACITY OF THE CASH BOOKS AND THE E NTRIES MADE THEREIN. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION WITHOUT VERIFYING THE CASH BOOK A ND MERELY HELD THAT IT WAS UNEXPLAINED, THUS, THE ADDI TION WAS WRONGLY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND RIGHTLY D ELETED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE STAND OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS AFFIRMED. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 30/06/2015. SD/ - (RAJENDRA) SD/ - (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER $ % MUMBAI; ( DATED : 04/08/2015 F{X~{T? P.S/. . . %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *+,- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./,- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 0 0 $ 1# ( *+ ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 0 0 $ 1# / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 34 .# , 0 *+' * 5 , $ % / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 6! 7% / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, /3+# .# //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , $ % / ITAT, MUMBAI