RUKSANA SULEMAN CHAMADIA,MUMBAI V. ITO CIRCLE 42(1)(1), MUMBAI

MA 102/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves a miscellaneous application filed by the assessee, Ruksana Suleman Chamadia, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 155/Mum/2024. The application contested the Tribunal's previous finding regarding the total cash withdrawn, claiming it was inaccurately recorded as Rs 40,00,000 instead of Rs 1,08,29,103. The assessee argued that this miscalculation led to an incorrect conclusion about the source of cash deposits from withdrawals. The Tribunal, however, dismissed the application, stating that the issues raised were akin to seeking a review of its own decision, which is not allowed under the specified section of the Income Tax Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705792 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIRABHADRA MAHAJAN; DR
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY SINGH AKSHAY PAWAR; ARS

Judgement Text

" | आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ा यपीठ, मुंबई | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No. 102/Mum/2025 A/o I.T.A. No. 155/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ruksana Suleman Chamadia Flat No. 10, Kanti Mahal CHS, Telli Park Road Andheri East Mumbai - 400069 [PAN: ABLPC9149G] Vs Income Tax Officer, Cirlce 42(1)(1), Mumbai अपीला थ\u0016/ (Appellant) \u0017\u0018 यथ\u0016/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Singh / Shri Akshay Pawar, A/Rs Revenue by : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 27/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 30/06/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM : This miscellaneous application by the assessee is directed towards the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 155/Mum/2024 dated 29/08/2024 pertaining to AY 2017-18. 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee reads as under:- “13. The said Order incorrectly records the fact that the total cash withdrawn was only Rs 40,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Lakhs Only) whereas it was Rs. 1,08,29,103/- (Rupees One Crore Eight Lakhs Twenty Nine Thousand One Hundred and Three Only). It is pertinent to note that a sum of Rs. 21,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Only) was given to Jishan Chamadia on 13/08/2015 being F.Y. 2015-2016, wherein, the Opening Balance as on 01/04/2015 was Rs. 54,07,507/- (Rupees Fifty Four Lakhs Seven Thousand Five Hundred and Seven Only) and the Closing Balance as on 31/03/2016 was Rs. 26,17,911/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Nine Hundred and Eleven Only), differential and detailed working can be seen in the Cash Book bearing Pg. No. 1_& 27 (paper book of 60 pages) annexed in the Paper Book. A sum of Rs. 14,00,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Only) was given M.A. No. 102/Mum/2025 2 to Mr. Jibran Chamadia on 28/11/2016 being F.Y. 2016-2017, wherein, the Opening Balance as on 01/04/2016 was Rs. 26,17,911/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Nine Hundred and Eleven Only) and the Closing Balance as on 31/03/2017 was Rs. 2,33,985/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Thirty three Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty Five Only), differential and detailed working can be seen in the Cash Book bearing Pg. No. 26 (paper book of 60 pages) annexed in the Paper Book. In lieu of the above it is crucial to note there are two different Financial Years involved and thus Cash balance ought to have been compared for two different Financial Years rather taking available Cash balance as on 31.03.2016 and reducing the withdrawal in F.Y. 2016-2017. This wrong calculation of cash available and utilisation has led to the incorrect conclusion by the Hon’ble Bench and hence the Assessee has not been able to justify the source of cash deposit from the withdrawal. This is a mistake apparent on record amendable to rectification u/s 254(2) of the Act.” 3. Having heard the rival submissions, we have carefully perused the order of the Tribunal. Findings given at para 8 of its order by the Tribunal are self-explanatory and need no further modification. The issues raised by the assessee amounts to review by the Tribunal of its own decision which is not permissible u/s 254(2) of the Act. 5. In the result, miscellaneous application by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 30th June, 2025 at Mumbai. Sd/- Sd/- (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 30/06/2025 * * * *SC SrPs SC SrPs SC SrPs SC SrPs M.A. No. 102/Mum/2025 3 आदेश की \u0015ितिलिप अ\u001aेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. \u0015 थ / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\" / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु\" ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \u0015ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 6. गाड& फाई/ Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Mumbai "