Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Ramshankar B. Kabra, Huf, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer-31(3)(1), Mumbai on 30 January, 2018
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
MUMBAI BENCH "SMC", MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.6058/M/2017
Assessment Year: 2009-10
M/s. Ramshankar B. Kabra, Income Tax Officer -31(3)(1),
HUF Bandra Kurla Complex,
Tower No.4, Flat No.401, Bandra (East)
Rusotomjee Ozone, Mumbai - 400 012
Vs.
Off. Goregaon Mulund Link
Road,
Goregaon (W),
Mumbai-400 062
PAN: AAKHR0502G
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Present for:
Assessee by : None
Revenue by : N. Hemalatha, D.R.
Date of Hearing : 20.12.2017
Date of Pronouncement : 30.01.2018
ORDER
Per D.T. Garasia, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28.06.17 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2009-10.
2. The short facts of the case are that assessee is a HUF and has filed its return of income on 01.02.10 declaring total income of Rs.1,53,581/-. The assessee has deposited cash of Rs.11,55,000/- in his saving bank account. The assessee was given show cause notice under section 148 of the Act and assessment was reopened and addition was made.
2 ITA No.6058/M/2017M/s. Ramshankar B. Kabra, HUF
3. Matter travelled to the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) considering the same has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
4. During the course of hearing before me, the assessee did not remain present. Therefore, I have no alternative except to endorse the action of the Ld. CIT(A) who has passed the order in detail by paras 5.7 & 5.8 which read as under:
"5.7 Vide Order Sheet dated 30/05/2017 the assessee was also directed to show cause how huge agricultural income is been declared by it and how the 'balance sheet' surpluses are being claimed. Further the assessee was also confronted that the Kishtbandi Khatauni copy only mentions the land area of 8.760 acres of various joint owners including the Karta of the assessee and is not the total landholding of the assessee only. In response to the above, the assessee filed letter dated 27/06/2017 which was filed on 28.06.2017 enclosing a photocopy of "Bhu Adhikar Avam Rin Pustika (Ekakrit) Bhag 1 avam Bhag 2 of Ramshankar Bhimraj (L Sr.No. C 026288). As per this the total holding of Ramshankar Bhimraj is only about 3 acres. This land holding is not sufficient to generate yearly surpluses in any case. The assessee gave no explanation about the agricultural income, the manner of its earning, the source of the expenses incurred, the details of the agricultural inputs etc etc. Vide letter dated 27/06/2017 the assessee had further admitted that it has never spent any money for the maintenance, upkeep etc. of any of the coparceners or any other member. This itself supports the view that that due to its meagre land holdings there were no surplus funds available with the HUF over the years and therefore the entire cash deposited in the bank account is only an unaccounted money of the assessee from an undisclosed sources. It was also noted that the assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs. 7,51,875/- on 12/08/2008 from the bank account and the money ultimately reached M/s Aluwind Architechtural Pvt Ltd, a family concern where a sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- was credited in the name of the assessee on 19/08/2008. This gives the reason for depositing huge amount of cash in the bank account of the assessee. The reason is that the family concern M/s Aluwind Architectural Pvt Ltd required funding. This compan y has only 1.07,700 shares and all the shares are with the sons, daughters in law, grandsons etc of the Karta of the HUF. In order to create a source of funds with the Company, cash was first deposited in the bank account of the HUE in FY 2008-09 and the same was transferred to the Company.
5.8 Thus it is seen that all the arguments taken by the assessee do not substantiate in any manner the claim of the assessee of having in its possession agricultural income surpluses at any stage. In view of the same, the grounds of appeal no.1,2,3 & 4 of the assessee are dismissed. The addition of Rs.10,01,419/- is held to be the unaccounted money of the 3 ITA No.6058/M/2017 M/s. Ramshankar B. Kabra, HUF assessee and the same is directed to be brought to tax under section 69A of the Act."
5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30.01.2018.
Sd/-
(D.T. Garasia) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 30.01.2018.
* Kishore, Sr. P.S. Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The CIT (A) Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench //True Copy// [ By Order Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.