SURINDERKUMAR BANSILAL SHARMA ,MUMBAI V. DCIT CC 4(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1565/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Surinder Bansilal Sharma, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) - 52, Mumbai, which pertained to the assessment year 2018-19. The primary grievances included the upholding of an addition of Rs 37,10,286 as unexplained investment in jewellery and an addition of Rs 29,00,000 concerning cash seized during a search at the appellant's premises. The appellant argued that the sources of the jewellery and the seized cash were adequately explained and documented, being withdrawals from his partnership firm, Sabari Developers LLP, and recorded in the audited books. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to the absence of documentary evidence, as the appellant could not attend the proceedings due to illness. The Tribunal found merit in granting a rehearing to allow the appellant to present his case fully.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 652794 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAVITA P. KAUSHIK; DR
• Assessee Lawyers: VINODKUMAR BINDAL VIRTUALLY; SATISH GUPTA PHYSICALLY
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

" | आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ा यपीठ, मुंबई | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1565/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Surinder Bansilal Sharma Plot No. 525, Ujagar Niwas 12th Road, Chembur Mumbai - 400071 [PAN: AAGPS8222G] Vs DCIT अपीला थ\u0016/ (Appellant) \u0017\u0018 यथ\u0016/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal (virtually) & Satish Gupta (Physically) Revenue by : Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik, Sr. D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 18/06/2025 आदेश/O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A) – 52, Mumbai [hereinafter “the ld. CIT(A)”] dt. 16/10/2024 pertaining to AY 2018-19. 2. The grievance of the assessee reads as under:- “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding an addition of Rs 37,10,286/- u/s 69A made by AO as unexplained investment in jewellery seized at the time of search, though the sources of the entire jewellery found at the time of search including the seized jewellery was duly explained with evidence in the assessment proceedings. The impugned addition made without considering the submission of appellant must be deleted. 2. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of AO who made an addition of Rs 29,00,000/- u/s 69A of the Act in respect of cash seized at the time of search from the premises of the appellant ignoring the submission and evidence placed on record that the said cash was withdrawn by the appellant from his partnership firm (Sabari I.T.A. No. 1565/Mum/2025 2 Developers LLP) and is duly recorded in the audited books of account of the firm, submitted before the Income tax Department. Thus, the addition should be deleted. 3. The impugned appellate order is bad in law because due to illness, the appellant could not appear before CIT(A) on the last dates. 4. The appellant craves the leave to add, substitute, modify, alter, delete or amend all or any ground of appeal either before or at the time of hearing.” 3. At the very outset, referring to the documentary evidence filed in the paper book, the ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly conceded that the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) were not attended which prompted the ld. CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for want of documentary evidence. The ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for another opportunity before the ld. CIT(A). 4. We are of the considered view that the assessee should get one more opportunity to defend its case and present/furnish all the necessary documentary evidence in support of its defense. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fairplay, we remit the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The assessee directed to attend the appellate proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) may decide the issues on merits of the case and on facts available before him. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 18th June, 2025 at Mumbai. Sd/- Sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 18/06/2025 *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs I.T.A. No. 1565/Mum/2025 3 आदेश की \u0014ितिलिप अ\u0019ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u001b / The Appellant 2. \u0014 थ\u001b / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु! / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु! ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \u0014ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 6. गाड% फाई/ Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Mumbai "