CHETAN S CHANDRANI, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 23(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 752/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2424 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 04-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND KUMARDR
• Assessee Lawyers: DEVENDRA H JAIN
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 80C

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES C, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.752/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2009-10 MR. CHETAN S. CHANDRANI, 8, 1 ST FLOOR, SUKESHJI VALJI LADDHA, X ROAD, MULUND, (WEST), MUMBAI-400080 / VS. ITO, WARD-23(2)(2), C-10, BKC, IT BLDG., 2 ND FLOOR, ROOM NO.205, BANDRA (EAST), MUMBAI-400051 ( /ASSESSEE) ( ! / REVENUE) PAN. NO. AAGPC7155A / ASSESSEE BY SHRI DEVENDRA H JAIN ! / REVENUE BY SHRI ARVIND KUMAR-DR ' !# $ % / DATE OF HEARING : 16/11/2015 $ % / DATE OF ORDER: 24/11/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 30/11/2012 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI, ON THE GROUND THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITI ON OF MR. CHETAN S CHANDRANI ITA NO.752/MUM/2013 2 RS.20,87,867/- MADE U/S 69 OF THE ACT IN A CASE WRI TTEN IS FILED U/S 44AE OF THE ACT AND FURTHER NOT JUSTIFIED IN REMANDING BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFIC ATION OF CLAIM OF RS.1 LAKH U/S 80C OF THE ACT, PAYMENT OF A DVANCE TAX OF RS.15,000, BEING PART OF ADMITTED TAX AND NO T ENTERTAINING THE ADDITIONAL CLAIM OF LOSS OF FUTURE AND OPTIONS AMOUNTING TO RS.1,52,758/-, BEING PART OF ALTERNATE/LEGAL CLAIM RAISED BEFORE HIM/HER. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI DEVENDRA JAIN, ADVANCED ARGUMENT S, WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED. THE ASSES SEE ALSO FURNISHED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28/02/2014 IN THE CASE OF WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE, WHEREIN, IT WAS CLAIMED THAT RELIEF WAS GRANTED IN THE CASE OF THE WIFE. THE LD. DR, SHRI A RVIND KUMAR, STRONGLY OPPOSED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE, BY SUBMITTING THAT AT BEST, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, F ILED BEFORE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SHOULD HA VE BEEN REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE ARE OF THE VIEW, THAT MANDATE OF THE CONSTITUTION IS TO LEVY AND COL LECT DUE TAXES, THEREFORE, IN ALL FAIRNESS, WE REMAND THIS A PPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE CL AIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEI NG HEARD, DECIDE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, THUS, THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. MR. CHETAN S CHANDRANI ITA NO.752/MUM/2013 3 FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 16/11/2015. SD/- SD/- ( ASHWANI T ANEJA ) (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER ' # MUMBAI; ' DATED : 24/11/2015 F| P.S/. .. %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. )*+, / THE APPELLANT 2. -.+, / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / / ' 0 ( )* ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. / / ' 0 / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 2!3 - , / )*% ) 4 , ' # / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 5 6# / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, .2* - //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , ' # / ITAT, MUMBAI.