SHRI BINDER PAL MITTAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1297/CHANDI/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 April 2021AY 2010-112 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the additional evidence submitted by the assessee was just and necessary for proper adjudication. The CIT(A) had correctly considered the remand report from the Assessing Officer which confirmed the assessee's claim.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition to the assessee's income for unexplained cash deposits. The assessee claimed the source was sale proceeds of land and provided sale deeds and other evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidence and whether the source of cash deposits was sufficiently explained by the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

explain the source of the aforesaid amount into his bank account. He, therefore, made the impugned addition into the income of the assessee.

3.

Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has explained that the source of the above said deposits was out of sale proceeds of the land. The assessee in this respect submitted the copy of the sale deed and other necessary evidences. The said evidences were referred by the CIT(A) to the Assessing officer. The Assessing officer after going through the registration deed, report of the Tehsildar, distance of land from the municipal limits, bank statement of the assessee etc., reported in the remand report that the cash was deposited by the assessee from the sale of his agricultural land. Keeping in view the remand report, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the additions so made by the Assessing officer.

4.

Before us Ld. DR has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has illegally admitted the additional evidences.

5.

We are not inclined to accept the above contention of the Ld. DR. The additional evidences submitted by the assessee were just and necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter. Before forming any opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) has called for the remand report from the Assessing officer and found that the claim of the assessee to be correct.

6.

In view of the above, no interference is called for in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →