Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, JABALPUR
O R D E R
PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM:
1. The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/CIT(A) passed u/s 143(3)r.w.s147 and 250 of the Act.
The assessee has raised fallowing grounds of appeal are as under:
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the orders passed by the lower authorities under sec. 143(3) read with section 147 and under sec. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are bad in law and on facts and against the principles of natural justice.
Jitendra Pratap Singh Bagri, Satna. - 2 -
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 6,57,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash deposits in bank account investment/trading in commodities. used for
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the authorities below ought to have accepted the explanation regarding savings from agricultural sources considering the extent of agricultural holdings and savings from agricultural income earned by the family of the appellant.
4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, charging of interest under sec. 234A at Rs. 2,318/- and interest under sec. 234B of the Income-tax at Rs. 1,05,469/- is unjustified, unwarranted, excessive and against the principles of natural justice.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the initiation of penalty proceedings under sec. 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is unjustified, unwarranted, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the orders of the authorities below are contrary to facts and law.
7. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or modify any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the grounds of appeal No.1 and the additional ground of appeal raised are not pressed and accordingly are treated as withdrawn and dismissed.
Jitendra Pratap Singh Bagri, Satna. - 3 -
At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and filed an application for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned are reasonable and the Ld.DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, condone the delay and admit the appeal
The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has not filed the return of income u/sec 139 of the Act. The Assessing Officer(AO) has received the information that the assessee has not submitted the return of income though the assessee was engaged in the commodity trading transactions and there are cash deposits in the bank account maintained with Vijaya Bank. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. In compliance, the assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2011-12 on 04.07.2018 disclosing a total income of Rs.1,16,288/- and agricultural income of Rs1,32,530/-.Subsequently the notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act are issued. The AO in the course of hearing proceedings the AO has called for various details in respect of commodity transactions and to furnish the details of ledger account, computation of income, sources of investment and bank statement.
Jitendra Pratap Singh Bagri, Satna. - 4 - Whereas the assessee has submitted summary sheet of trading account, client financial register and bank account statement and the assessee has incurred loss of Rs. Rs.4,93,241/- from commodity trading transactions. Further the assessee has explained that the assessee has maintained account with vijaya bank and the credits are out of current year income and savings from the earlier years and savings of family members. Whereas the A.O was not satisfied with the explanations and made the addition of Rs.6,57,000/- and assessed the total income of Rs. 7,73,288/- and passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act dated 29.10.2018.
5. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the AO and has confirmed the additions by the AO and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.
6. At the time of hearing the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in not considering the facts that the assessee has made cash deposits out of the agricultural
Jitendra Pratap Singh Bagri, Satna. - 5 - incomes and savings and these facts have been disclosed before the lower authorities. The Ld.AR mentioned that the family members of the assessee are holding agriculture lands and derives agriculture income and deposits in the bank account are from these sources. Further the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has a good case on merits and has filed an application for admission of the additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT rules. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that the evidences were not examined by the lower authorities and the Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(A).
We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the additions of credits and cash deposits in the bank account by the A.O. as the transactions are not supported with the documentary evidences and sources. The Ld.AR emphasized that the assessee has submitted the details as called for by the authorities. The assessee is filling the application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT rules with the capital account, affidavit, Pan, Aadhar Card and copy of khasra showing the agriculture land holdings of elder brothers, income tax details and return of income
Jitendra Pratap Singh Bagri, Satna. - 6 - of the assessees wife and khasra of agriculture holdings of the assessee which were not available earlier and could not produce before the lower authorities. Further the evidences play a important role in decision making in the adjudicating proceedings. Therefore considering the facts, circumstances and additional evidences, the assessee should not suffer for non filing of material information, as the evidences played a vital role in decision making and admit the additional evidences. Accordingly, to meet the ends of justice, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the entire disputed issues along with the additional evidences to the file of the assessing officer to decide afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information. Accordingly, we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Orders pronounced in the open court on 15.09.2023