ITO-6(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SANJAY JAGDISH PATEL, THANE
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI OM PRAKSH KANTIncome Tax Officer 6(3)(1) Room No.524, 5th Floor Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020 vs Shri Sanjay Jagdish Patel 601, Siddhachal CHSL, Pkhran Road, Vasant Vihar,Thane-400 601 PAN : AACPP5531F APPELLANT
This appeal filed by the revenue is arising out of the order of the Learned
Commissioner of Income-tax,(Appeals)-5,Mubai[hereafter, Ld.CIT(A)], dated
11/02/2025 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The only effective ground raised by the revenue in the present appeal relates to the Ld.CIT(A) deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer made under section 68 of the Act, by not appreciating the facts of the case.
2
ITA 2929/Mum/2025
Sanjay Jagdish Patel
We have heard the arguments of both the counsels, perused the materials placed on record, judgements cited before me and also the order passed by the revenue authorities. 4. From the records we noticed that the addition of Rs. 24,53,591/- was made in the hands of assessee on account of money received by the assesse from one Ravi Prakash, who, upon investigation by the Investigation Wing was found to have opened a bank account for a short period of time and deposited huge cash into it. Whereas the assesse had taken a specific stand that this payment has been received on behalf of service rendered to M/s Romex International. The assessee had submitted that the receipt had been appropriated towards the amount payable by M/s Romex International and the source of the same is not relevant for him as there is no legal bar on the same. It was also submitted that similar addition has been made in the case of one of the group concerns, viz. Kamal Clearing an Forwarding Agency Private Limited in which the co-ordinate bench of ITAT vide its order dated 02/01/2025 in ITA No1575/Mum/2024 has already decided the issue in favour of the appellant therein. After having gone through the facts of the present case and also the order passed by the co-ordinate bench of ITAT in the case of Kamal Clearing an Forwarding Agency Private Limited (supra), we find that there is no doubt about the fact that the assessee had already disclosed the receipt from Ravi Prakash as his business receipt on account of receivable from M/s Romex International and moreover, the co-ordinate bench of ITAT has already taken a decision under the similar facts and circumstances. Therefore, while adhering to the principles of judicial consistency and discipline, we dismiss the ground raised by the revenue and uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A).
3
ITA 2929/Mum/2025
Sanjay Jagdish Patel
In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 24 day of July, 2025. (OM PRAKASH KANT) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, िदनांक/Dated: 24/07/2025 Pavanan Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ /The Appellant , 2. ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयु CIT 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुबंई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड फाइल/Guard file.
BY ORDER,
////
(Asstt.