ISHWARSINGH BALWANT SINGH DEORA (ALIAS KISHOREKUMAR JAGDISHKUMAR SHAH),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 773/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 December 2019AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remit the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration in light of the additional evidence submitted by the assessee. The assessee was to be given an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee is aggrieved by the confirmation of additions made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act for various assessment years, relating to unsecured loans from relatives. The assessee had filed additional evidence and requested that the matter be remanded for fresh consideration.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made under Section 68 for unexplained unsecured loans were justified, and if additional evidence should be considered by remanding the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pawan Singh (JM)

For Appellant: Shri Shashank Dhundu
For Respondent: Shri Akhtar H. Ansari
Hearing: 1.10.2019Pronounced: 4.12.2019

Heard together (4 matters)

I.T.A. No. 773/Mum/2018
I.T.A. No. 774/Mum/2018
I.T.A. No. 775/Mum/2018
I.T.A. No. 776/Mum/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :-

These are appeals by the assessee wherein the assessee is aggrieved by the confirmation of addition u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, by ex-parte order of learned CIT(A) dated 31.10.2017 as under :- A.Y. 2009-10 Rs. 32,500/- A.Y. 2011-12 Rs. 2,65,000/- A.Y. 2012-13 Rs. 1,39,500/- A.Y. 2014-15 Rs. 3,59,500/- These appeals were earlier disposed of by the Tribunal by ex-parte order dated 28.9.2018. Subsequently, they were recalled. Pursuant to recall, we have heard these appeals.

3.

Learned Counsel of the assessee submits that the addition in this case u/s. 68 of the Act was done by the Assessing Officer on the ground that there

2 Shri Ishwarsing Balwant Singh Deora were no supporting for justification u/s. 68 of the Act unsecured loan received from the relatives.

4.

Upon assessee’s appeal learned CIT(A) also confirmed the same by ex- parte order. Now, learned Counsel of the assessee submits that the assessee filed additional evidences and learned counsel prayed that these may be remanded to the authorities below for considering afresh of the issue.

5.

Per contra, learned Departmental Representative submits that additional evidence submitted by learned counsel cannot fructify the case of the assessee.

6.

Upon careful consideration, we are of the considered opinion that this issue may be remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall consider the issue afresh in the light of additional evidence being submitted by the assessee in the interest of substantial justice. Needless to say that the assessee should be given adequate opportunity of being heard.

7.

In the result all these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order has been pronounced in the Court on 4/12/2019.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →