SURESH PRASAD CHOKHANI, MUMBAI V. ITO, CIRCLE - 4(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7106/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5599 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 10-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHAITANYA ANJARIA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAHUL K HAKANI
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Set aside
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) I.T.A. NO. 7106/MUM/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ) SURESH PRASAD CHOKHANI 602, SAVOY CHAMBERS DATTATRAY ROAD, OFF LINKING ROAD, SANTACRUZ WEST, MUMBAI-400 054. PAN : AD KPC7748Q VS . ITO CIRCLE 4(3)(1) AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI-400 020. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAHUL K. HAKANI DEPARTMENT BY SHRI CHAITANYA A NJARIA DATE OF HEARING 18 .02 . 20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18.06.2020 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST OR DER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS DATED 5/10/2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE ISSUE RAISED IS THAT LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) ER RED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AMO UNTING TO RS. 5, 67,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED INFORM ATION FROM THE INVESTIGATION WING THAT ASSESSEE HAS BEEN BENEFICIARY OF BOGUS PU RCHASE BILL FOR DIAMOND FOR THE AFORESAID AMOUNT. BASED UPON THE INVESTIGATION WING FINDING IN THE CASE OF JAIN GROUP THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICE TO T HE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE RESPONDED THAT IT HAS SUBMITTED THE PURCHASABLE BIL L AND THAT THE PARTY FROM WHOM HE HAS PURCHASED THE DIAMOND HAS ALSO RESPONDE D TO THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER INFO RMED THAT HE HAS PURCHASED THE DIAMOND FOR HIS OWN USE AND HAS NOT USED IT FOR ANY TRADING PURPOSE. THE SURESH PRASAD CHOKHANI 2 ASSESSEE ALSO INFORMED THAT HIS SOURCE OF INCOME IS ONLY SALARY AND INTEREST INCOME. HOWEVER THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT SATIS FIED HE PROCEEDED TO ADD THE AFORESAID AMOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. THI S WAS DULY CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. 4. AGAINST THIS ORDER ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. I FIND TH AT ASSESSEES SOURCE OF INCOME IS SALARY AND INTEREST INCOME. THERE IS NO W HISPER WHATSOEVER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT ASSESSEE IS ANYWAY ENGAGED IN THE SALE AND PURCHASE OF DIAMONDS. ASSESSEE HAS DULY SUBMITTED THE PURCHASE VOUCHERS. THE PARTY FROM WHOM THE DIAMOND HAS BEEN PURCHASED HAS ALSO D ULY RESPONDED. ASSESSEE HAS ALSO INFORMED THAT HE HAS PURCHASED TH E DIAMONDS FOR HIS OWN CONSUMPTION. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, THERE IS N O REASON WHATSOEVER FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO MAKE THE ADDITION UNDER SECTIO N 69 SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF INVESTIGATION WING REPORT IN THE CASE OF JAIN GROUP . IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THERE IS NO CASE MADE OUT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ADDITION OF THE AFORESAID AMOU NT. ACCORDINGLY, I SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DIRECT THAT THE ADDITION SHOULD BE DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED ON 18.6.2020 UNDER RULE 34(4) OF THE ITAT RULES. SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 18/06/2020 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT SURESH PRASAD CHOKHANI 3 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) PS ITAT, MUMBAI