MOHAN H KHANCHANDANI, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 36, MUMBAI

ITA 7988/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 798819914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2012
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 28-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH D JIWNANI
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.7988/MUM/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04) SHRI MOHAN H. KHANCHANDANI, 114, LAUNGANI LODGE, S.V. ROAD, KHAR (WEST), MUMBAI -421 052 ...... APPELLANT VS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -36, MUMBAI ..... RESPONDENT PAN: AGPPK 5420 R APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAMESH D. JIWNANI RESPONDENT-REVENUE BY: SHRI PAWAN VED DATE OF HEARING: 26.04.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09.05.2012 O R D E R R.S. PADVEKAR, JM: IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPU GNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A)-36, MUMBAI DATED 27.09.2011 FOR THE A.Y. 2003-04. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE MULTIPLE GROUNDS BUT THE SOLITARY ISSUE FOR ADJUDICATION IS WHETHER THE A.O. WAS JUSTIFIED IN M AKING THE ADDITION OF ` 1,36,000/- ON THE REASON OF THE LOW PERSONAL WITHD RAWAL. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS ARE AS UNDER. THERE WA S SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S.132 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT IN HICONS & PRANAY GROUP CASES AND THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO COVERED IN TH E SAID ACTION. IN CONSEQUENCES OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION THE AS SESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO FILE THE RETURN U/S.153A DECLARING TOTA L INCOME OF ` 54,630/-. THE A.O. COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECS. 143(3) R.W.S.153A OF THE ACT. THE A.O. OBSER VED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE LOW WITHDRAWALS FOR THE HOUS EHOLD EXPENSES FOR THE A.YS. 2003-04 TO 2009-10. THE A.O. HAS GIV EN THE CHART ITA NO.7988/MUM/2011 SHRI MOHAN H. KHANCHANDANI 2 SHOWING THE WITHDRAWALS OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIF E AND DAUGHTER NAMELY PREETI N. KHANCHANDANI. IN THE OPINION OF TH E A.O. THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES OF THE ASSESSEE IS SHOWN AT ` 42,000/- PER ANNUM WAS LOW CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES STATUS. T HE A.O., THEREFORE, ESTIMATED DRAWING OF THE ASSESSEE AT ` 15,000/- PER MONTH AND WORKED OUT THE ANNUAL DRAWING OF ` 1,80,000/- AND DEDUCTED ` 42,000/- DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND MADE THE ADDI TION OF ` 1,38,000/-. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. ON THE PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER I FIND THAT THE A.O . HAS MADE THE ADDITION ONLY ON THE ESTIMATION. THE A.O. COULD HA VE TAKEN SOME PAINS TO BRING ON RECORD RELEVANT MATERIAL FACTS OR AT LEAST SOME EVIDENCES TO SUPPORT THE ADDITIONS MADE BY HIM IN R ESPECT OF ALLEGED LOW DRAWINGS. THE A.O. IS ALSO NOT AWARE WHETHER T HE ASSESSEE HAS ANY MINOR CHILDREN. IN FACT, ENTIRE ADDITION IS TO BE STRUCK DOWN BUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT IN THE A.Y. 2005-06, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN DRAWING TO THE EXTENT OF ` 85,500/,- I, THEREFORE, SUSTAIN THE ADDITION OF ` 38,000/- MAKING THE TOTAL DRAWING TO ` 80,000/- (PER ANNUM) ( ` 38,000 + ` 42,000). ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION IS SUSTAINED T O ` 38,000/- AND ASSESSEE GETS THE RELIEF OF ` 1 LAKH. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOW ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 9 TH MAY 2012. SD/- ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 9TH MAY 2012 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A)-36, MUMBAI. 4) THE CIT (CENTRAL)-1, MUMBAI. 5) THE D.R. SMC BENCH, MUMBAI. ITA NO.7988/MUM/2011 SHRI MOHAN H. KHANCHANDANI 3 BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI *CHAVAN