KADY MERCANTILE PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(2), MUMBAI

The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 29/11/2017 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai,

confirming the addition of Rs.11,26,000/- made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act).

received the amount by cheque and the bank merged with another bank, therefore, the assessee could not produce the bank statement, consequently, the assessee may be provided

opportunity to explain the amounts. So far as, the amount of Rs.18,000/- is concerned, it was explained that she holds the PAN but did not file the return, therefore, the assessee may be given opportunity to explain the same. It was pleaded that the assessee is in a position to file confirmation with respect

to loan.

defended the addition confirmed by Ld. Assessing Officer but added that if the argument of the assessee is accepted then it needs verification at the level of the Ld. Assessing Officer.

are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in cloths, declared nil income in its return filed on 30/09/2013,

which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny, therefore,

notice under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served upon the assessee along with a questionnaire calling

upon various details and explanation. It was noted by the ld.

Assessing Officer that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.14,17,000/- on various dates in his Deutsche Bank

accounts, the details of which are mentioned in the assessment order. The assessee was asked to furnish the source of above deposits along with documentary evidence.

The stand of the Revenue is that the assessee could not furnish the necessary evidence with respect to cash deposited

in the bank account. However, before this Tribunal the claim

of the assessee is that during the relevant time, the bank

merged with another bank, therefore, the necessary

documents/evidences could not be furnished and if a chance

is given, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its claim. Considering the totality of facts, principle of natural

justice and the arguments narrated before me, I am of the view that so far as the addition under section 68 of the Act is concerned, onus is upon the assessee to explain the nature,

genuineness and creditworthiness, therefore, the assessee is directed to furnish the necessary evidence, if any, in support

of its claim before the Ld. Assessing Officer, who will examine

the claim of the assessee afresh and decide in accordance

with law. So far as, the other additions are concerned, the assessee has to substantiate its claim, thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The assessee be given opportunity.

Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 10/10/2018. (Joginder Singh) "या"यक सद"य / JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांक Dated : 10/10/2018 f{x~{tÜ? P.S /"नजी स"चव

आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.