J. OM PRAKASH, MUMBAI V. I.T.O. WARD 11(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 7238/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9477 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Next Hearing Date: 05-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 25-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES J MUMBAI . . , . / BEFORE SHRI B.R. MITTAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER / AND , . . SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 7238/M/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 J. OM PRAKASH, SHIV PRATIMA 12 TH N.S. ROAD, JVPD SCHEME, JUHU, MUMBAI-400 049. PAN: AAHPM 0354 L VS. ITO WARD 11(1)(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. MARG, MUMBAI. ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI K. GOPAL ! /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RAKESH RANJAN (DR) ' ! #$% / DATE OF HEARING : 05-12-2012 &'( ! #$% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05-12-2012 )* / O R D E R PER RAJENDRA, AM THE PRESENT APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DT .02.09.2011PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-3, MUMBAI. FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE: 1.0 THE LD. CIT APPEAL SERIOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN ARBITRARILY UPHOLDING THE LEGAL VALIDIT Y OF THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S. 148 OF THE ACT. THE LD. CIT APPEAL RELIED ON DECISIONS WHICH A RE DISTINGUISHABLE ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE. HE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPELLANTS CASE, THE PRINCIPLE OF MUTUALITY WOULD APPLY AND AS SUCH THE ASSESSMENT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN RE-O PENED ON THE BASIS OF RUBBER STAMP REASONS RECORDED IN A MECHANICAL MANNER. SIM ILARLY HE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE MANDATORY PRO VISIONS OF SECTION L44A HAD BEEN GROSSLY VIOLATED AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN PREDATED RESULTING IN MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. 2.0 THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT APPEALS AND THE ENTIRE ASSESSMENT ORDER BE ANNULLED AND THE DEMAND BE QUASHED. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO. 1 & 2 ABOVE ITA NO. 7238/M/2011 J. OM PRAKASH 2 3.0 THE LD. CIT APPEALS SERIOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN ARBITRARILY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.5 0,000/- BEING VALUE OF ICICI BONDS RECEIVED AS GIFTS. THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON AND TH E REASONING GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT APPEALS ARE CONTRARY TO THE JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS AND THE CAS E LAWS CITED ARE DISTINGUISHABLE ON FACTS. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS. 50,000/- BE DELETED. 4.0 THE LD. CIT APPEALS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE CHA RGING OF THE INTEREST U/S.234 B/234C/234D. THE APPELLANT DENIES ITS LIABILITY TOW ARDS THE SAID INTEREST AND PRAYS THAT THE SAME BE DELETED. 2. ASSESSEE, AN INDIVIDUAL, ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS O F PRODUCING MOTION PICTURES, FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 31.10.2003 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.3,87,820/-. LATER ON NOTICE U/S. 148 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961 (ACT) WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER(AO) FINALISED THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER U/S.143(3) R.W.S.147 OF THE ACT ON 31.08.2009, DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.5,37,730/-. 3. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AO MADE CERTAIN ADDITIONS TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE THAT WERE CHALLENGED BEFORE THE FIRST APPEAL AUTHORITY (FAA). ONE OF THE ADDITION UPHELD BY THE FAA WAS ABOUT VALUE OF I CICI BONDS AMOUNTING TO RS.50,000/- CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AS GIFT. OTHER ADDITION OF RS. ONE LAKH MADE BY THE AO WAS DELETED BY THE FAA. 4. IN THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ASSESSEE R AISED FOUR GROUNDS OF APPEAL, BUT THE EFFECTIVE GROUND WAS ABOUT THE GIFT OF RS.5 0,000/-. BEFORE US, AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PRESSING ALL THE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION. AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRESSED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NOS.1 TO 4, SAME ARE DISMISSED. APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE AY 2003-04 STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 5 TH DECEMBER, 2012. )* ! &'( % , -)'. 5TH DECEMBER, 2012 ' ! / 0 SD/- SD/- ( . . / B.R. MITTAL ) ( / RAJENDRA ) )1 / JUDICIAL MEMBER % )1 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, -)' DATE: 5 TH DECEMBER, 2012 TNMM ITA NO. 7238/M/2011 J. OM PRAKASH 3 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. THE CONCERNED CIT (A) 4. THE CONCERNED CIT 5. DR J BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE 2# # //TRUE COPY// )*' )*' )*' )*' / BY ORDER, 3 33 3 / 4 4 4 4 DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , / ITAT, MUMBAI