SHRI NIZAMUDDIN MANSOORALI SAYANI ,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, 17(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 4776/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Nizamuddin Mansoorali Sayani against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre, which pertained to the assessment year 2012-13. The primary issue was the addition of unexplained cash deposits to the total income of the assessee. The assessee contended that these deposits were made from cash balances recorded in the Books of Account, which were generated from cash sales. The AO had made the addition without examining these records. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice and the need for a fair examination of the provided documents, decided to remit the matter back to the AO for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474410 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “B” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4776/Mum/2024 Assessment Year :2012-13 Shri Nizamuddin Mansoorali Sayani, B-Block, 4th Floor, Room No. 47, 76, 77, 7 Bundeali Bldg., Haji Bachu Ali Road, Off. S.V.P. Road, Dongari, Mumbai PAN : ASYPS9959C vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-17(2)(4), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sameer G. Dalal For Revenue : Ms. Monika H. Pande Date of Hearing : 28-01-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29-01-2025 PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M : The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dt.24-07- 2024 passed by the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟] and it relates to AY. 2012-13. 2 ITA No. 4776/Mum/2024 2. At the outset,we notice thatthe Ld.CIT(A) was constrained to pass the order ex-parte since the assessee did not appear before him. The dispute involved in this appeal is related to un-explained cash deposits added to the total income of the assessee. The Ld.AR submitted that the cash deposits have been made out of cash balance available in the Books of Account. The Ld A.R further submitted that the assessee had also furnished the details of cash sales and also produced the Books of Account before the AO. However, without considering the Books of Account and the details furnished by the assessee, the AO has made the impugned addition. Further, the assessee could not appear before the Ld.CIT(A) for the reasons beyond its control. Accordingly, the Ld.AR submitted that, in interest of natural justice,all the issues may be remitted to the file of the AO with a direction to re-examine the issue by duly considering the Books of Account and other details furnished by the assessee. 3. We heard the Ld.DR and perused the record. The explanation of the assessee is that the impugned cash deposits have been made out of cash balance available in the Books of Account, which was in turn, generated out of cash sales effected by the assessee. It is the submission of the assessee that the assessee has produced the Books of Account and other details before the AO. The AO has made this addition, without examining the Books of Account and other details. If the cash deposit has been made out of the cash balance available in the Books of Account, the same would stand explained by the Books of Account itself and in that case, no addition u/s. 69 of the Act is warranted. However, since the AO did not examine the Books of Account, the claim of the assessee requires verification by examining the Books of Account. Accordingly, we are of the view that this issue requires fresh examination at the end of the AO. Accordingly we set 3 ITA No. 4776/Mum/2024 aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and restore all the issues to the file of the AO for examining them afresh, in the light of discussions made supra. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 29-01-2025 Sd/- Sd/- [SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL] [B.R. BASKARAN] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 29-01-2025 TNMM Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) TheD.R,ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file By Order Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai "