SUDHIR DAMJI BHARANI,MUMBAI V. .ITO, WARD 27 (3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4054/MUM/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sudhir Damji Bharani against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention revolves around the issuance of a notice under Section 148 and the subsequent assessment under Section 147, which the assessee argued should have been conducted under Section 153C, based on information from documents seized during a search of another person. Additionally, the assessee contested the addition of Rs. 20,00,000 as unexplained money under Section 69A, which was alleged to be a cash loan to M/s. Evergreen Enterprises, a company purportedly not in existence during the relevant year. The CIT(A) had dismissed the initial appeal due to non-compliance by the assessee, which was attributed to issues in tracking email communications regarding hearing notices.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 475383 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UODAL RAJ SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: ADITYA RAMCHANDRAN
• Keywords: Documents seized
• Section: 147; 148; 143(1); 69A; 153C

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH ‘H(SMC)’, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4054/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sudhir Damji Bharani Flat No. 1302, Tower No. 8, Orchard Residency, LBS Marg, Behind R City Mall, Ghatkopar (West), Mumbai-400086. PAN: AAAPB 6726 C vs ITO, Ward-27(3)(1), Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Mr. Aditya Ramchandran Revenue by : Shri Uodal Raj Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 6.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 12.12.2024 O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, AM: This appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 12.07.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), NFAC Delhi. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer erred in issuing the notice under Section 148 based on the information pertaining to the appellant which was found from the books of accounts/documents seized during the course of search of the other person which was contrary to the provisions of Section 153C. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment framed u/s 147 of the Act is bad in law in so far as the same should have been framed u/s 153C of the Act since it is based on the information contained in the books of accounts/documents seized or requisitioned during the course of search of the other person. ITA No.4054/Mum/2024 Sudhir Damji Bharani A.Y. 2012-13 2 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the addition of unexplained money amounting to 20,00,000 under Section 69A. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the findings of the Assessing Officer that the appellant had advanced a loan of ₹ 20,00,000 in cash to M/s. Evergreen Enterprises. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact that M/s. Evergreen Enterprises itself was not in existence during the year under consideration and, therefore, there could not have been any transactions between it and the appellant. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, since the appellant had not been provided the opportunity to cross examine those persons on whose statements the ld. AO has relied upon to make addition, the said addition is required to be deleted.” 2 Fact in brief is that return of income declaring total income at Rs. 3,04,300/- was filed on 30.07.2012. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 17.08.2013. Subsequently information was received from DDIT(Inv), Unit-5(4), Mumbai that assessee had received cash loan from the entity of M/s. Evergreen Enterprises operated by Mr. Nilesh Bharani on the basis of documentary evidences found in the search as well as statement of Shri Nilesh Bharani recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act. On the basis of such information it was found that assessee Shri Sudhir Damji Bharani has lent cash loan of Rs. 20,00,000/- to the assessee in the F.Y. 2011-12 relevant to the A.Y. 2012-13. Since the assessee had not explained such cash loan transaction, therefore, the same was added to the total income of the assessee as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. ITA No.4054/Mum/2024 Sudhir Damji Bharani A.Y. 2012-13 3 3. The assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, the assessee failed to make any compliance before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee reiterating the fact stated by the assessing officer. 4. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel submitted that assessee could not make compliance before the ld. CIT(A) as assessee could not keep track on the e- mail through which notices of hearing was issued to the assessee. The ld. Counsel contended that more opportunities be provided before the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal of the assessee on merit. 5. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel submitted that assessee could not keep track on the notices received through e-mail in respect of the hearing proceedings initiated before the ld. CIT(A) and requested for providing more opportunities for adjudicating the case of the assessee on merit before the First Appellate Authority. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, we consider it appropriate to restore the case of the assessee to file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding afresh on merit in accordance with the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act after providing three more opportunities to the assessee to make submission on the points raised by the First Appellate Authority. The assessee is also directed to make due compliance before the ld. CIT(A) without any failure. ITA No.4054/Mum/2024 Sudhir Damji Bharani A.Y. 2012-13 4 Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12.12.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai: 12.12.2024 Biswajit, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: 2. The Respondent: 3. The CIT, 4. The DR . //True Copy// [ By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai "