ACIT CIR 1, THANE V. DEEPAK R. BHANDARI, THANE

ITA 7023/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 83782 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 09-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PITAMBAR DAS
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBODH RATNAPARKHI
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

D IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI H.L. KARWA, HONBLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.7023 /MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-2008 ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, ASHAR O.T. PARK, 6 TH FLOOR, B WING, ROOM NO. 22, WAGLE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, ROAD NO. 16 Z, THANE 400 604. / VS. SHRI DEEPAK R. BHANDARI, PROP. M/S PLASTO-PACK INDUSTRIES, 207/208, NARMADA, LAXMI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, VARTAK NAGAR, THANE (W) 400 606. ./ PAN : ABJPB4916C ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) A PPELLANT BY SHRI PITAMBAR DAS R E SPONDENT BY : SHRI SUBODH RAT NAPARKHI / DATE OF HEARING : 09-09-2014 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12-09-2013 [ !' / O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER DATED 14-08-2012 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) II, THANE AND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 2007-08. 2. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD. CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 73,07,027/- OUT OF TH E AGGREGATE ADDITION OF RS. 1,03,41,196/-. 3. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ABOVE SAID ISSUE ARE S TATED IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BLISTER PACK ING. FROM THE BALANCE ITA 7023/M/12 2 SHEET FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE SUNDRY CREDITORS BALANCE WAS SHOWN AT RS. 1,03,41,196/-. IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE SAID OUTSTANDING BALANCES, THE A.O. ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH TH E DETAILS RELATING TO THEM. SINCE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH ANY DETAIL, TH E A.O. ADDED THE ABOVE SAID SUM OF RS. 1,03,41,196/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69-C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 4. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE FURNI SHED DETAILS BEFORE LD CIT(A) AND HENCE THE LD. CIT(A) CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE A.O. IN THE REMAND REPORT, THE A.O. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSE SSEE DID NOT FURNISH ADDRESS OR PAN OF THE CREDITORS AND HENCE IT WAS NO T POSSIBLE FOR HIM TO ISSUE NOTICES U/S 133(6) OF THE ACT TO THEM IN ORDER TO V ERIFY THEIR GENUINENESS. THE A.O. FURTHER REPORTED THAT THE SUNDRY CREDITORS AGG REGATING TO RS. 30,34,169/- HAS REMAINED UNCHANGED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSID ERATION AND THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CARRY OUT ANY TRANSACTION WITH THE M. ACCORDINGLY THE A.O. EXPRESSED THE VIEW THAT THE CORRECTNESS AND GENUINE NESS OF THESE CREDITORS ARE MORE DOUBTFUL. THE LD. CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO EXA MINE THE ABOVE SAID AMOUNT OF RS. 30,34,169/- AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITIO N TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 21,31,401/-. SINCE THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT HE HA S PAID SOME AMOUNT IN THE SUCCEEDING YEAR TO SOME OF THE CREDITORS, THE L D CIT(A) DIRECTED THE A.O. TO EXAMINE THE CREDITORS HAVING BALANCE AGGREGATING TO RS. 9,02,768/-. ACCORDINGLY THE LD CIT(A) DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT DISCUSS ANYTHING ABOUT THE B ALANCE CREDITORS HAVING AGGREGATE BALANCE OF RS. 73,07,027/- (RS. 1,03,41,1 96/- (-) RS. 30,34,169/-). THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN NOT DISPOSING OF THE ADDITION RELATING TO RS.73,07,027/- STATED ABOVE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND ALSO PERUSED THE R ELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, BOTH THE PARTIES AGREED THAT THE ADDITION RELATING TO RS. 73,07,027/- WAS N OT DISPOSED OF BY LD CIT(A). ITA 7023/M/12 3 BOTH THE PARTIES SUGGESTED THAT THE SAME MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O., SINCE THE SAME INVOLVES VERIFICATION OF DETAI LS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD CIT(A). THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O. HAS MADE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION U/S 69-C OF THE ACT AND THE SAID SECTION MAY NOT BE APPLICABLE HERE. ACCORDINGLY, HE PRAYED THAT THE A O MAY BE DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE SAID ISSUE ALSO. SINCE THE DETAILS FU RNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD CIT(A) REQUIRE VERIFICATION, WE DEEM IT F IT TO SET ASIDE THE MATTER RELATING TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 73,07,027/- TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. WITH A DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THE SAME AFRESH BY DULY CONSID ERING THE INFORMATION AND EXPLANATIONS THAT WERE ALREADY FURNISHED AND/OR THA T MAY BE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE HIM. THE A.O. IS ALSO DIRECTED TO DISCUSS ABOUT THE APPLICABILITY OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69-C OF THE ACT TO THE INSTANT MATTER AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER,2014. !' # $% &! ' 2.-09-2014 ( ) SD/- SD/- (H.L. KARWA) (B.R. BASKARAN) PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ 2 MUMBAI ; &! DATED 12-09-2014 [ .3../ RK , SR. PS ITA 7023/M/12 4 ! '#$% &%# / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 4 () / THE CIT (A)-32, MUMBAI 4. 4 / CIT CITY 21,,MUMBAI 5. 78( 339: , 9: , $ 2 / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI D BENCH 6. (<= > / GUARD FILE. ' / BY ORDER, 7 3 //TRUE COPY// (/') * ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , $ 2 / ITAT, MUMBAI