SANDEEP SADASHIV PATIL, MUMBAI V. ITO 26(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 783/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4549 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V S JADHAVDR
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH B SHAH
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

, - , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES SMC, MUMBAI , ! ' , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, ITA NO.783/MUM/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SANDEEP SADASHIV PATIL, 10, NANDANVAN, ODHAV NAGAR, BORIVALI EAST, MUMBAI-400066 / VS. ITO-26(2)(1), ROOM NO.608, 6 TH FLOOR, SMT. KAMLADEVI MITTAL AYURVEDIC HOSPITAL BUILDING CHARNI ROAD, MUMBAI-400002 / ASSESSEE / REVENUE P.A. NO. AGLPP0967B $ % & / ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAJESH B. SHAH $ % & / REVENUE BY SHRI V.S. JADHAV-DR / DATE OF HEARING 12/01/2016 & / DATE OF ORDER: 12/01/2016 & / O R D E R THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 27/11/2014 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL PERTAINS TO A DDITION OF RS.2,19,623/- ADDED AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND NON- ITA NO.783/MUM/2015 SANDIP SADASHIV PATIL 2 GRANTING OF OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND FURNISHI NG THE EVIDENCE/EXPLANATION. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI RAJESH B. SHAH, INVITED MY ATTEN TION TO PAPER BOOK NO. 2 CONTAINING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, WH ICH COULD NOT BE FURNISHED BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER A S WELL AS BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE ASSES SEE HAS FURNISHED CONFIRMATION FROM IGATE DATED 06/01/2016, COPY OF CORRESPONDENCE (EMAIL) BETWEEN ASSESSEE AND EMP LOYER, EARNING STATEMENT OF JANUARY 2010, COPY OF TAX RETU RN, COPY OF STATEMENT OF BANK OF AMERICA FOR JANUARY 2010, C OPY OF WORK PERMIT UK, COPY OF LETTER OF PATNI OF DEPUTATI ON TO UK FROM JUNE 2008, STATEMENT OF FINAL SETTLEMENT AND C OPY OF HSBS BANK STATEMENT FROM FEBRUARY 2009 TO APRIL 20 11. ALL THESE DOCUMENTS ARE IN THE FORM OF ADDITIONAL E VIDENCE WHICH WERE NOT FURNISHED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES. TH US, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSE E. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR, SHRI V.S. JADHAV, CONTENDED THAT THESE DOCUMENTS NEEDS ANALYSIS/EXAMINATION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, SO THAT INTEREST OF REVENUE MAY BE SAFEGUARDED. 2.1. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN VIEW O F THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS, FILED FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE THE TRIB UNAL, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT AS PER ARTICLE 265 OF THE CONSTITUTIO N OF INDIA, DUE TAXES HAS TO BE LEVIED/COLLECTED, THEREFORE, TO SAFEGUARD ITA NO.783/MUM/2015 SANDIP SADASHIV PATIL 3 THE INTEREST OF BOTH SIDES, THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTE D TO FILE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, WHICH GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATER, BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS EXAMINATIO N. IT IS DIRECTED THAT DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BE PRO VIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, THUS, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN TH E PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVE FROM BOTH SIDES AT T HE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 12/01/2016. SD/- (JOGINDER SINGH) ! ' / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 12/01/2016 F{X~{T? P.S / ! & $ )!*+ ,&+-* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '#$%& / THE APPELLANT 2. '(%& / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ) ) * ( '#$ ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. ) ) * / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. -./ ' , ) '#$ ' 1 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. /2 3$ / GUARD FILE. & / BY ORDER, (-# ' //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI