KEWALKISHAN KOTIMAL AGARWAL, MUMBAI V. ITO 28 (2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7344/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4388 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY J SETHI
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGA RWAL, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 7344 / MUM/20 19 (A.Y: 2009 - 10 ) KEWALKISHAN KOTIMAL AGARWAL FLAT NO. 703, KRISHNA RESIDENCY PLOT NO. 97, SECTOR - 29 VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI - 400703 PAN: AABPA3896K V. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2 8 (2)(1) ROOM NO. 307, 3 RD FLOOR TOWER NO. 06 VASHI RAILWAY STATION COMPLEX VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI - 400703 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SANJAY J. SETHI DATE OF HEARING : 02.09.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02 .09.2021 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. TH IS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 26 , MUMBAI [HEREINAFTER IN SHORT LD.CIT(A)] DATED 25.09.2019 FOR THE A.Y . 2009 - 10 . 2. ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN HIS APPEAL: - 2 ITA NO. 7344/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009 - 10) KEWALKISHAN KOTIMAL AGARWAL 1. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 26, MUMBAI HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 21,72,574/ - BEING 100% OF ALLEGED BOGUS PURCHASES. 2. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 26, MUMBAI HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER CHAPTER VI - A OF RS. 1,12,540/ - . 3. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 26, MUMBA I HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 70,000/ - AS UNEXPLAINED MONEY U/S 69A. 4. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 26, MUMBAI HAS ERRED IN SUSTAI NING THE ADDITION OF RS. 250,000 / - AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT U/S 69. 5. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 26, MUMBAI HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX - PARTE. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, DELETE OR MODIFY ALL OR ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHE R . 3. INSPITE OF ISSUE OF NOTICE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. THEREFORE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL ON HEARING THE LD. DR ON MERITS. 4. WE HAVE H EARD LD. DR, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. ON A PERUSAL OF THE LD.CIT(A) ORDER, WE FIND THAT EVEN THOUGH THE LD.CIT(A) PROVIDED OPPORTUNITY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AS SESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCE 3 ITA NO. 7344/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2009 - 10) KEWALKISHAN KOTIMAL AGARWAL MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSEE SHOU LD BE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THUS, THIS APPEAL IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) FOR DENOVO ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) AND SHALL COOPERATE WITH THE APPELLATE PROCEED INGS WITHOUT TAKING UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS. THUS, THIS APPEAL IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE VIRTUAL COURT ON 02.09.2021. SD/ - SD/ - (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (C.N. PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI / DATED 02 .09.2021 GIRIDHAR, SR.PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUM