ITO 22(1)(4), NAVI MUMBAI V. NILESH M SHAH, MUMBAI

ITA 67/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 88683 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 31-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PAWAN KUMAR BEERLA DR
• Keywords: Peak credit

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI , . . , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.67/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 INCOME TAX OFFICER-22(1)-4 ROOM NO.412, 4 TH FLOOR, TOWER NO.6, VASHI RAILWAY STATION COMPLEX, VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI-400705 / VS. SHRI NILESH M. SHAH, B-5, VARSHA OLIVE CHS, SHRADHANAD ROAD, VILE PARLE (EAST), MUMBAI-400057 ( # / REVENUE) ( $%& ' /ASSESSEE) P.A. NO. AAJPS1507K # / REVENUE BY SHRI PAWAN KUMAR BEERLA-DR $%& ' / ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAKESH JOSHI ( #) * ' + / DATE OF HEARING : 31/03/2015 * ' + / DATE OF ORDER: 01/04/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DAT ED 31/10/2012, OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, M UMBAI, ON SHRI NILESH M. SHAH 2 THE GROUND THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN ALLOWING RELIEF TO THE EXTENT OF RS.14,52,600/- WITHOUT REFERRING THE WORKING OF PEA K TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND FURTHER CONFIRMING ONLY THE P EAK OF THE DEPOSITED AMOUNT OF RS.3,45,820/- WITHOUT THE CONSI DERATION OF BANK STATEMENTS, AVAILABLE ON RECORD IN WHICH IT WAS FOUND THAT ASSESSEE UTILIZED THE CASH DEPOSITS TOWARDS IN VESTMENT, EXPENSES AND PARTLY FOR SELF WITHDRAWAL. 2. DURING HEARING, SHRI PAWAN KUMAR BEERLA, LD. DR, DEFENDED THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT IN THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER BY ADVANCING HIS ARGUMENTS, IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI RAKESH JOSHI, LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE BROADLY DEFENDED THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 2.1. WE NOTE THAT THE CRUX OF ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY LD. DR IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT GRANTED OP PORTUNITY TO EXAMINE THE FACTUAL POSITION AS NECESSARY DETAIL S WERE NOT FILED BEFORE HIM. IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS.17,98,420/- WAS DEPOSITED IN CASH ON VARIOUS DAT ES AS ENUMERATED IN PARA-2 ONWARDS OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R. EVEN ASKING BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE DETAILS O F SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS WAS NOT FILED AND MERELY FILED A LETT ER DATED 24/11/2008. ADMITTEDLY, THE BURDEN OF PROVING THE SOURCE LIES ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF TH E CASH ENTRIES. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, THE ASSESSEE IS DI RECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AND FURNIS H THE DETAILS BEFORE HIM. THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUN ITY. THE SHRI NILESH M. SHAH 3 ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE TO HIS SATISFACTION AND FURTHER TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF PEAK CREDIT. THUS, THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE I S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 31/03/2015. ,- * ./0 12 31 /0 3 /2015 * ) 7 SD/ - (N.K. BILLAIYA) SD/ - (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) MUMBAI; 1 DATED : 01/04/2015 F{X~{T? P.S/. . . %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. 89:; / THE APPELLANT 2. <=:; / THE RESPONDENT. 3. , , ( >' ( 89 ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. P4. , , ( >' / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. @#A <'$ , , 89+ 8$ 0 , ( ) / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. B% C ) / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, =@9' <' //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , ( ) / ITAT, MUMBAI