, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.8740/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 MOHAMMAD SHAFI GAHLOT, SACHIN HOUSE, 18, DADABHAI ROAD, ANDHERI (WEST), MUMBAI-400053 / VS. ITO-20(3)(3), 5 TH FLOOR, ROOM NO.521, PIRAMAL CHAMBER, LALBAUG, MUMBAI-400012 ( / REVENUE) ( '#$ /ASSESSEE) P.A. NO. ABUPG5090K '#$ / ASSESSEE BY SHRI MOHAMMAD SHAFI GAHLOT / REVENUE BY SHRI J.K.GARG-DR % & ' ( / DATE OF HEARING : 26/08/2015 ' ( / DATE OF ORDER: 21/09/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DA TED 03/09/2010 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI. THOUGHT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN VARIOUS GROUNDS BUT THE MAIN GROUND PERTAINS TO NOT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORT UNITY OF MOHAMMAD SHAFI GEHLOT ITA NO.8740/MUM/2010 2 BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND THUS, CONFIRMING TH E ADDITION. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL, WE HAVE HEARD, T HE ASSESSEE AND SHRI J.K.GARG, LD. DR. THE CRUX OF ARG UMENT ADVANCED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED. THE LD. DR MERELY CONTENDED THAT THE INTER EST OF REVENUE MAY BE SAFEGUARDED. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACTS , IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE TOOK GIFT OF RS.2 LAKH EACH F ROM M/S ROSHAN GAHLOT AND MR. IRSHAD GAHLOT WHO ARE WIFE AN D SON RESPECTIVELY. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITI ON OF RS.4 LAKH OF THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT BY TREATING THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT TH E ASSESSEE, AT THE RELEVANT TIME WAS CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF WORKS CONTRACTS AND LABOUR JOBS. THE ASSESSEE IS A LSO A PARTNER IN M/S MASTER ASSOCIATES. WITHOUT GOING IN TO MUCH DELIBERATION, WE FIND THAT BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NOBODY WAS PRESENT, MEANING TH EREBY, FROM THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS FROM THE REVENUE. IN S UCH A SITUATION, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD, THEREFORE, WE REMAND THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) TO ADJUDICATE THE SAME AFRESH. THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO BEEN CASUAL IN HIS APPROACH IN NOT ATTENDING THE PROCEED INGS, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO APPROACH THE OFFICE OF MOHAMMAD SHAFI GEHLOT ITA NO.8740/MUM/2010 3 THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WITHIN ONE MONTH FROM THE RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. IF THE ASSESS EE FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPEALS) WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME, THEN HE IS FREE TO DISP OSE OFF THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO ENTITLED TO FURNISH EVIDENCE, IF A NY, IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM. THUS, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 24/08/2015. SD/ - (ASHWANI TANEJA) SD/ - (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER % & MUMBAI; ) DATED : 21/09/2015 F{X~{T? P.S/. . . %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. +,- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./,- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 0 0 % 1 ( + ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 0 0 % 1 / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 34 .' , 0 +( ' 5 , % & / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 6# 7& / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, /3+ . //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , % & / ITAT, MUMBAI