ASHOK B. GUPTA (HUF), MUMBAI V. ITO 19(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 699/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3637 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 14-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A RAMACHANDRAN
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHOK B GUPTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.699/M/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 ASHOK B. GUPTA (HUF), 18, SURTI CHAMBERS, 2 ND DHOBHI TALAO LANE, MUMBAI 400 002 PAN: AAAHA4357A VS. ITO 19(2)(1), 3 RD FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUGH, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHOK B. GUPTA, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI A. RAMACHANDRAN, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 16.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.08.2016 O R D E R PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSES SEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.12.2013 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2009-10. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1) THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN : - 1.01 CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.2,30,11,968/- ON ACC OUNT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS. 1.02 NOT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT SUNDRY CREDITORS OF RS.2,90,54,072/- WERE OUTSTANDING AS ON 01.04.2008 I. E. OPENING BALANCE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR AND CANNOT BE TAXED IN A. Y. 2009-2010. 1.03 NOT CALLING FOR REMAND REPORT FROM LEARNED A.O . IN RESPECT OF FOLLOWING DETAILS SUBMITTED FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFO RE LEARNED CIT (A):- A) STATEMENT REFLECTING DETAILS OF SUNDRY CREDITORS INCLUDING THEIR NAME, PAN & ADDRESS. B) LEDGER ACCOUNT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS. C) XEROX COPY OF BANK STATEMENT. ITA NO.699/M/2014 ASHOK B. GUPTA (HUF) 2 1.04 CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS.64,95,783/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS OF FOLLOWING PARTIES :- A) BALKRISHNA PODDAR (INTEREST ONLY) 4,02,153.00 B) BALKRISHNA PODDAR (HUF) (INTEREST II) 1,73,277.00 C) SAMARPAN TEXTILE PVT. LTD. 33,71,592.0 0 D) SARBOTIDEVI PODDAR 3,10,750.00 E) VINAY PODDAR (HUF) 1,39,221.00 43,96,993 F) VINAY PODDAR (HUF) 12,43,687.00 G) SIMMI VINAY PODDAR 8,55,103.00 (7,59,417+95,686 INTEREST) _____________ 64,95,783.00 _____________ 1.05 ADDING OPENING BALANCE OF LOAN AMOUNT OF RS.7, 59,477/- IN CASE OF SIMMI PODDAR. 1.06 ADDING CLOSING BALANCE OF LOAN AMOUNT OF RS.12 ,43,687/- IN CASE OF VINAY PODDAR (HUF). 3. THE ABOVE REPRODUCED GROUNDS OF APPEAL REVEAL TH AT THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED ON ACCOUNT OF CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION BY THE LD. CIT(A) MADE BY THE AO IN RESPECT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AND ON ACCOUN T OF LOANS AND ADVANCES. THE MAIN CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN THAT T HE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE ADDITIONS IN RESPECT OF THE OPENING BALANCES O F SUNDRY CREDITORS AS WELL AS LOAN AND ADVANCES. FURTHER THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D FURNISHED STATEMENTS, CONFIRMATIONS, DETAILS AND EVIDENCES RELATING TO TH E CURRENT YEARS SUNDRY CREDITORS AND IN RESPECT OF LOAN AND ADVANCES BEFOR E THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NEITHER HIMSELF LOOKED INTO THE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE NOR CALLED FOR ANY REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO IN THIS RESPECT. HE, THEREFORE, HAS PRAYED THAT THE ASSESS EE MAY BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT THE NECESSARY DETAILS TO THE AO FOR THE J USTIFICATION OF ITS CLAIM OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AND LOAN AND ADVANCES. 4. THE LD. D.R. HAS ALSO NOT OBJECTED AGAINST RESTO RING THE MATTER TO THE AO FOR GOING THROUGH THE DETAILS AND EVIDENCES RELI ED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.699/M/2014 ASHOK B. GUPTA (HUF) 3 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE RESTORE THE ISSUES TAKE N IN THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DECISION AFRESH. NEEDLESS TO SAY THA T THE AO WILL GIVE PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE AND FILE NECESSARY DETAILS AND EVIDENCES. WE FURTHER DIRECT THAT AO WILL NOT MAKE ADDITIONS DISPUTING THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS OF EARLIER ASSESSMENT Y EARS WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 6. WE ALSO DIRECT THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AO AS AND WHEN CALLED FOR AND WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE I N UNNECESSARY DELAY IN DISPOSAL OF THE CASE BEFORE THE AO. 7. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEAL OF THE A SSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.08.2016. SD/- SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 16.08.2016. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.