Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: Shri Joginder Singh,
आदेश / O R D E R
The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 28/03/2016 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai. The only ground raised in the present appeal pertains to confirming the addition of Rs.6,25,000/- on account of alleged unexplained cash.
During hearing, Shri Manish Sanghavi, ld. counsel for the assessee, explained that search was carried out u/s 132 of the Act at the residential and business premises of Aquatic Group of cases on 09/09/2010. The ld. counsel disputed the findings contained in the assessment order as well as in the impugned order that the cash under question belongs to any group by claiming that it belongs to family members of the joint family. My attention was invited to pages 39 and 40 of the paper book showing availability of cash. The ld. counsel explained that the total cash available with the group companies as well as various members of the family was to the tune of Rs.79,86,725/- , out of which, the cash seized was Rs.55,46,500/-(page 40 of the paper book). The ld. counsel claimed that the cash was accepted by the Assessing Officer in the cases of other family members and merely in the case of the present assessee, the addition was made to the tune of Rs.6,25,000/- as unexplained cash. It was further explained that in the case of assessee cash of Rs.4,87,500/- was very much available. My attention was also invited to availability of cash with other family members (as per cash book, page 40 of the paper book).
2.1. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri A. Rajhans, defended the addition by arguing that the benefit of availability of cash has already been given to the assessee.
My attention was invited to para 6.3 of the assessment order and page 6 of the impugned order.
2.2. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that a search action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 09/09/2010 at the residential/office premises of Aquatic Group of cases. A search was also conducted upon the assessee. A locker number G733 at Kuber Safe Vaults Ltd. was also opened, which was in the name of assessee on 21/09/2010, from which a cash of Rs.28,07,500/- was found and seized. The statement of the assessee was recorded, during search, and the assessee stated that the cash belongs to her husband. During assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to explain the source of the cash seized from the locker. Shri Bharat Mehta, husband of the assessee filed a letter dated 22/02/2012, claimed that the locker belongs to him and his family members by explaining that he and his family members are parts of a joint family and the cash belongs to the family members as it is impossible to have different cash boxes. It is also noted that while recording the statements, the assessee Smt. Daksha Mehta and Smt. Prity Mehta also explained that the cash was given to them by their respective husband, who are directors in the group companies. Without adverting further, I found that the total cash balance available with the group companies and family members was to the tune of Rs.79,86,725/- out of which Rs.55,46,500/- was seized (page-40 of the paper book).
It is also noted that the availability of cash with the assessee was Rs.4,87,500/- and the remaining amounts available as detailed at page-40 itself. The total amount of Rs.61,07,800/- was seized on various dates from various persons of the joint family (page-39- exhibit-B of the paper book). The ld. counsel for the assessee filed various assessment orders in the case of other family members/concern of the group, wherein, the ld. Assessing Officer admitted the availability of cash( pages 73 to 211 of the paper book). This factual matrix was not controverted by the ld. DR. Considering the availability of cash ( as per books) in the hands of group companies and family members, I am of the view that source of cash, added in the hands of the assessee, is duly explained as all the family members are residing in a joint family and sufficient cash was available with them. This factual matrix even was not disputed by the Revenue, thus, the appeal of the assessee deserves to be allowed, therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition.
Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
This order was pronounced in the open in the presence of ld. representative from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 31/08/2016.