MY CITY PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 107/HYD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 February 2021AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities failed to address the assessee's contention that the impugned sum was an opening balance from prior years. Therefore, the issue was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s order which upheld the AO's action of treating Rs. 74,08,000 as unexplained cash credit. The assessee claimed the amount represented advances received in earlier years, forming part of the opening balance.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities properly adjudicated the assessee's claim that the impugned sum was an opening balance from prior years and not a cash credit in the current year.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES : BENCH “A” HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI S.S. GODARA & SHRI L.P. SAHU

Hearing: 20/01/2021Pronounced: 05/02/2021

This assessee’s appeal for A.Y.2012-13 arises from Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4 ‘[CIT(A)]’, Hyderabad’s order dated 28.11.2016 passed in case no. 0247/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short the ‘Act’].

At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 142 days in filing of the instant appeal before the tribunal. Mr. Kumar stated the reason thereof to be attributable to lack of appropriate communication between the auditors and arguing counsel and compilation of necessary records and corresponding vouchers which has not been rebutted from the department’s side, is ./2018 AY: 2012-13 My City Properties Pvt. Ltd. condoned as the same is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to beyond the taxpayer’s control.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee has challenged both the lower authorities’ action treating an amount of Rs.74,08,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. A perusal of assessment order dated 31st March, 2015 suggests that the impugned sum comprises of twin amounts of Rs.50,96,000/- and Rs.23,12,000/- in the names of Mrs. Anna J Mohan and Shri S.Subrahmayam ; respectively. Assessee’s stand from day one during scrutiny till its Form 35 submitted before the CIT(A) had been that since the impugned sum(s) had not either been credited or received during the relevant FY 2011-12 being advances received in much earlier assessment years, the same formed part of its opening balance only. This clinching aspect has neither been dealt with in assessment, nor in CIT(A)’s order. Latter authority’s order under challenge has not even discussed relevant factual matrix of the issue u/s 250(6) of the Act. We deem it appropriate therefore to restore this issue back to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee or its authorised representative shall appear before the CIT(A) on or before 31st July, 2021, with a copy of this remand order and consequential proceedings shall be finalised within three effective opportunities of hearing.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →