DR BADAR TAYEBBHAI MASKATI, MUMBAI v. ITO 11(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1464/MUM/2013 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2014

Appeal Details

RSA Number 146419914 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AAHPM6009L
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1464/MUM/2013
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant DR BADAR TAYEBBHAI MASKATI, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO 11(2)(2), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 25-11-2014
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 25-11-2014
Date Of Final Hearing 25-11-2014
Next Hearing Date 25-11-2014
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 22-02-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I.T.A. NO. 1464/M/2013 ( AY: 2009 - 2010 ) DR. BADAR TAYEBB HAI MASKATI 1 ST FLOOR HARISHANKAR LODGE 23 KARVE MARG CHARINI ROAD MUMBAI 400 004. / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER - 11(2)(2) MUMBAI. ./ PAN : AAHPM6009L ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI DEEPAK TRALSHAWALA / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AKHILENDRA YADAV SR. AR / DATE OF HEARING : 25 .11.2014 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 .11.2014 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 22.2.2013 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 3 MUMBAI DATED 29.1.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010. 2. IN THIS APPEAL ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS WHICH READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF THE SUM OF RS. 95 190/ - RECEIVED TOWARDS MEDICLAIM REIMBURSEMENT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE CONFIRMATION LETTER OF THE INSURERS BY SUMMARILY REJECTING THE EVIDENC E FILED BEFORE HIM. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN ADDING BACK THE SUM OF RS. 2 46 250/ - BEING THE GIFT RECEIVED FROM THE APPELLANTS DAUGHTER WHO IS AN NRI WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BEFORE HIM. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE CREDIT OF RS. 2 00 000/ - IN THE APPELLANTS JOINT BANK ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF LOAN RETURNED BY COMFORT CLINIC DEPOSIT EVIDE NCE BY WAY OF INFORMATION OF THE SAID PROPERTY AS WELL AS BANK STATEMENT OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR FROM WHICH THE SAID LOAN WAS ADVANCED WAS FILED BEFORE HIM AS WELL AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD CIT (A) H AS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THAT 50% OF THE RENT RECEIVED OF RS. 2 24 110/ - AND DEPOSITED IN THE JOINT ACCOUNT IS TO BE TAXED IN THE APPELLANTS HANDS WITHOUT CONSIDERING 2 THE FACT THAT DEDUCTION FOR MUNICIPAL TAX PAID AND REPAIRS @ 30% IS TO BE ALLOWED UNDER PR OVISIONS OF SECTION 24(A) OF THE ACT. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS. 53 482/ - MADE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF T HE CASE AND VARIOUS JUDGMENTS QUOTED. 6. HENCE THE TOTAL INCOME BE REDUCED BY RS. 95 190/ - ON ACCOUNT REIMBURSEMENT OF MEDICLAIM + RS. 2 46 250/ - ON ACCOUNT OF GIFT RECEIVED FROM DAUGHTER WHO IS AN NRI + 2 00 000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF REFUND OF LOAN WRONGLY CON SIDERED AS INCOME + ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS PROPERTY INCOME + RS. 53 482/ - BY DELETING THE ADDITION MADE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 READ WITH RULE 8D(III) THERETO. 3. AT THE OUTSET SHRI DEEPAK TRALSHAWALA LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DETERMINING THE ASSESSED INCOME AT RS. 33 53 464/ - AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 7 08 860/ - . ASSESSEE IS A DOCTOR BY PROFESSION AND HE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE DETAILS RE QUIRED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR THE VALID REASONS WHICH ARE MENTIONED IN THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 22.11.2014 FILED BEFORE US IN THE COURT. THE CONTENTS OF THE SAID AFFIDAVIT READ AS UNDER: 1. 2.. 3. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS MY CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT MR. NAVEEN BHAI MEHTA ATTENDED FROM TIME TO TIME AND FURNISHED REGULAR DETAILS REQUIRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE ASSESSMENT. THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS MR. NAVEEN MEHTA FELL ILL AND COULD NOT ATTEND. 4. THAT DURING THE SAID PERIOD I TOO WAS INDISPOSED WITH A CARDIAC AILMENT AND IN OUR ABSENCE MY ACCOUNTANT SHRI AJAY SHAH ATTENDED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BUT HE COULD NOT OFFER EXPLANATIONS IN THE ABSENCE OF PAPERS. MOREOVER CERTAIN DOCUMENTS COULD NOT B E PRODUCED AS THEY WERE DESTROYED DUE TO FIRE IN MY CLINIC. 5. THAT DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED HIM FOR THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL DETAILS: I) EXPLANATION FOR DEPOSITS IN MY JOINT SAVINGS ACCOUNT NO. WITH B ANK OF BARODA ALTAMOUNT ROAD BRANCH WHICH WAS JOINTLY HELD WITH MY SON. II) EVIDENCE FOR GIFTS RECEIVED FROM DAUGHTER WHO IS A NON - RESIDENT III) EVIDENCE OF REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED FROM INSURERS FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES INCURRED. IV) EVIDENCE OF DEPOSIT OF RS. 2 00 000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF REFUND OF LOAN BY ONE COMFORT CLINIC. 6. DUE TO ILLNESS OF MR. NAVEEN MEHTA AND MYSELF AND DUE TO DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN RE CORDS ON ACCOUNT OF FIRE NECESSARY EXPLANATION ALONG WITH EVIDENCE COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BY MY ACCOUNTANT SHRI AJAY SHAH. 7. THAT SINCE THE ASSESSMENT WAS GETTING TIME BARRED THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED THE ORDER BY ADDING UP THE FOLLOWING AMOUNTS. I) ENTIRE DEPOSITS OF RS. 13 68 992/ - IN MY SAID JOINT SAVINGS ACCOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME. II) THE GIFT O F RS. 2 46 250/ - RECEIVED FROM MY DAUGHTER MS. LOUBAINA BUXAMUSA [WHO WAS TRAVELLING AND THUS COULD NOT SEND NECESSARY EVIDENCE OF GIFT]. III) REFUND OF RS. 95 190/ - FROM INSURANCE COMPANY TOWARDS MY CLAIM FOR MEDICAL. 3 IV) REFUND OF LOAN OF RS. 2 00 000/ - BY COMFORT CLINIC WHICH FORMS A PART OF DEPOSIT IN THE ABOVE REFERRED SAVINGS ACCOUNT. 8. THAT THE DETAILS OF THE ABOVE DEPOSITS THOUGH NO SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER DUE TO ILLNESS OF MY CA AND MYSELF WERE SUBMITTED TO THE LD CIT (A) WHO DID NOT CONSIDER THE SAME. 4. IN THE ASSESSMENT ASSESSING OFFICER MADE NUMBER OF ADDITIONS ON AD - HOC BASIS ON ACCOUNTS OF TELEPHONE EXPENSES ENTERTAINMENT EXPENSES MOTOR CAR EXPENSES TRAVELLING EXPENSES ETC. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 5. DURING THE PRO CEEDINGS BEFORE THE CIT (A) ASSESSEE FILED THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIMS MADE IN THE RETURN. CIT (A) REJECTED THE SAME AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AGGRIEVED WITH THE DECISION OF THE CIT (A) ASSESSEE FIL ED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY RAISING THE ABOVE MENTIONED GROUNDS. 6. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO THE PAPERS WHICH FORM PART OF THE PAPER BOOK FILED BEFORE US AND SUBMITTED THAT TH E SAID PAPERS WHICH CONSTITUTE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ALTHOUGH WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY THEY WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE CIT (A) IGNORING THE REASONS MENTIONED IN THE AFFIDAVIT ABOVE. IN THIS REGARD LD COUNSEL PRAYED FOR ADMITT ING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND REMANDING THE ISSUES RAISED IN GROUND NOS.1 TO 4 IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE PRESENT CASE. 7. AFTER HEARING THE LD DR WE FIND THE REQUEST OF THE LD COUNSEL IS FAIR AND REASONABLE. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS I N THE AFFIDAVIT EXTRACTED ABOVE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES SHOULD BE ADMITTED AND THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN GROUND NOS.1 TO 4 SHOULD BE REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY GROUND NOS.1 TO 4 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN CONNECTION WITH GROUND NO.5 LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED THAT THE SAME IS NOT PRESSED. AFTER HEA RING THE LD DR IN THIS REGARD WE DISMISS ED THE SAID GROUND NO.5 AS NOT PRESSED. 9. GROUND NO.6 BEING SUMMARY OF THE OTHER GROUNDS IS CONSIDERED GENERAL IN NATURE AND THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS GENERAL. 4 10. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN CO URT ON 2 5 T H NOVEMBER 2014. S D / - S D / - ( AMIT SHUKLA ) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 2 5 /11/2014 . . ./ OKK SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. / DR ITAT MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT MUMBAI