CHINTAN C. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 23(2)(2), MUMBAI

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “सी मुंबई सी सी ” ” ” ” खंडपीठ सी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “C”Bench Mumbai सव�ी राजे��, लेखा सद�य एवं पवन �सह, �याियक सद�य Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Pawan Singh, Judicial Member आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./4315/Mum/2014, िनधा�रण िनधा�रण वष� वष� /Assessment Year: 2010-11 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा�रण िनधा�रण वष� वष� Income tax Officer, Ward 23(2)(2) Chintan C. Shah 504, Shital Apt. D/2, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Sarvoday Nagar, Mulund (W) Vs. Complex-Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 080. Mumbai-51. PAN:AADPS 3188 E (अपीलाथ� /Appellant) (��यथ� / Respondent) Revenue by: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang-DR Assessee by: Shri Bhadresh Joshi-AR सुनवाई क� तारीख / Date of Hearing: 29.06.2016 घोषणा क� तारीख / Date of Pronouncement: 29.06.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क� क� धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ�तग�त अ�तग�त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क� क� धारा धारा अ�तग�त अ�तग�त आदेश आदेश Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य राजे�� सद�य राजे�� राजे�� केकेकेके अनुसार राजे�� अनुसार अनुसार PER RAJENDRA, AM- अनुसार Challenging the order of the CIT (A)-33,Mumbai the assessee has filed the present appeal. Assessee,an individual,filed his return of income on 28/03/2012,declaring an income of Rs. 1.14 lakhs.The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act, on 21/01/2013,determining the income of the assessee at Rs. 72.44 lakhs. 2.Effective ground of appeal is about addition of Rs.71.29 lakhs.During the assessment proceedings the AO found that a sum of Rs.71,29,600/-was credited in the bank account main - tained by him with the Saraswat Bank,Mulund.He directed the assessee to explain as to why the said some should not be treated as income for the year under consideration. As per the AO, the assessee did not file any documentary evidence in that regard.The AO, therefore, added the entire sum to the income of the assessee. 3.Aggrieved by the order of the year, the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA).Before him,it was argued that the AO had added the entire amount of cash deposits as income of the assessee,that he had merely considered the deposit site of the bank account,that he completely ignored the withdrawal side of the same bank account, that the assessee had received the cash from various parties to whom he had issued the cheques of the desired amount,that the cash received from those parties were deposited into the savings bank

4315/M/14-Chintan account to ensure that the cheques could be issued to the parties concerned. The assessee enclosed copies of the statement of savings bank account along with a chart comparing the cash deposits and issuance of cheques against such cash deposits.It was further argued that the cheques issued by the assessee were cleared immediately after the deposit of cash of the more or less of the same amounts,that the details of beneficiaries to home the cheques were issued deliver relevant year had been prepared,that the assessee was engaged in providing accommodation entries whereby the cash was taken from the parties and cheques were issued to them, that by no stretch of imagination the cash deposited into the savings bank account could be considered as income of the assessee,that addition could be made on account of the commission in the range of 0.5% to 2% for doing such kind of activity,that the AO should have taken the peak of the amount is cash credit for the year under appeal. The assessee relied upon the cases of Jayesh V Mehta (ITA/5142/Mum/2009-dated29/06/2012),Jitendra M Doshi(ITA/3310/Mum/ 2011-29/08/2012).

4.After considering the submission of the assessee and the documents filed by him, the FAA forwarded the papers to the AO,as the order was passed under section 144 of the Act. The AO submitted his remand report on 19/12/2013.The FAA held that the assessee claimed that he was engaged in providing accommodation entries, that during the remand proceedings the AO had asked the assessee to give the names and addresses of the parties along with their PANs, that despite the opportunities given by the AO the assessee did not produce the names and addresses of the parties concerned from whom the assessee had claimed to have received cash, that it was surprising to note that he was not having the addresses of the parties to whom he had issued the cheques,that the cases relied upon by the assessee were distinguishable on facts. Finally, the FAA upheld the order of the AO.

5.During the course of hearing before us,the Authorised Representative(AR) referred to the of savings bank account where the cash was deposited by the assessee and contended that the assessee was providing accommodation entries,that he was receiving the cash from various parties and was issuing the cheques in lieu of the cash received, that he was earning small commission, that there was directly linked between the cash deposited and the cheques issued, that the peak amount of the deposits should have been taken by the AO. The Departmental

4315/M/14-Chintan Representative argued that the assessee had not furnished information about the persons from whom he had received the cash, that the AO were justified in making the addition.