JAWAHAR M. SETH, THANE V. ITO WD 2(1), THANE

ITA 7325/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9404 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 08-11-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V KRISHNAMOORTY
• Assessee Lawyers: R D KHONA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES I, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL (J.M.) AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA (A.M.) ITA NO. 7325/MUM /2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SHRI JAWAHAR M. SETH, R.D. KHONA, C.A., 104, ANANT LAXMI CHAMBERS, SHIVAJI NAGAR, NAUPADA, THANE (W) 400 602. PAN AGNPS4956J VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), THANE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI R.D. KHONA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI V. KRISHNAMOORTY DATE OF HEARING 08-11-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21-11-2012 O R D E R PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, J.M. THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DTD. 23-8-2010 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) II, THANE FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE A SSESSEE AN INDIVIDUAL, ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF INDENTING AND COMMISSION AGENT FOR SUPPLY OF MOBILE AND TELEPHONE ACCESSORIES FOR SMART PHONE. THE RETURN WAS FILED DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 1,58,616/-. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AT AN INCOME OF RS. 19,96,120/- INCLUDING THE ADDITION OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND LOAN AMOUNTING TO RS. 1 8,37,503/- VIDE ITA NO. 7325/MUM/2010 2 ORDER DTD. 14-12-2009 PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCO ME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT). ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWE D THE APPEAL. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US CHALLENGING IN ALL THE GROUNDS THE SUSTENANCE OF ADDITION OF RS. 2,00,000/-, RS. 4,00,000/-AND RS. 3 ,29,784/- MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CHALLENGED THE SU STENANCE OF ADDITION OF RS. 77,500/- ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF OLD SILVER UTENS ILS AND THE APPLICATION OF PROVISION OF SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE SUBMITS THAT HE HAS FILED ADDITIONAL PAPER BOOK FOR ADMISSI ON OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 29 OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RU LES, 1963 RUNNING FROM PAGES 17 TO 21 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK. H E FURTHER SUBMITS THAT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE SAME MAY BE A DMITTED. HE FURTHER SUBMITS THAT IN THE FIRST PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE A SSESSEE THE DOCUMENTS APPEARING AT PAGES 1 TO 12 WERE FILED BEFORE THE LD . CIT(A) AND THE DOCUMENTS APPEARING AT PAGES 13 TO 16 WERE FILED BE FORE THE A.O. AND THE LD. CIT(A). HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITS THAT, IN THE IN TEREST OF JUSTICE, ALL THE ISSUES MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R. WHILE RELYING ON THE ORDER OF THE A.O. AND THE LD. CIT(A) SUBMITS THAT HE HAS NO OBJE CTION IF THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. ITA NO. 7325/MUM/2010 3 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RIVAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FI ND THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CERTAIN DOCUMEN TS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND HAS ALSO FILED CERTAIN ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WE FURTHER FIND THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER. THEREFORE, WE, IN THE INTER EST OF JUSTICE, AFTER ADMITTING THE SAME, CONSIDER IT FAIR AND REASONABLE THAT THE MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. AND ACCORDIN GLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ON THIS ACC OUNT AND SEND BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. TO DECIDE THE IM PUGNED MATTER AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDING TO LAW AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTU NITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE AR E, THEREFORE, PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 7. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS PARTLY A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 21-11-2012. SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- (DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED : 21-11-2012 RK ITA NO. 7325/MUM/2010 4 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- II, THANE 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, THANE 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, BENCH I, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI