Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 93/JP/2019
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 93/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11 cuke Shri Gopi Lal Bairwa The ITO, Vs. 23,Indira Colony, Malpura, Ward, District- Tonk Tonk. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABPPB 3374 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S.L.Poddar (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Rooni Pal (DCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 26/06/2020 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 30/06/2020 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.01.2019 of ld. CIT(A)-III, Jaipur for the assessment order 2010-11. Due to prevailing COVId-19 pandemic condition the hearing of the appeal is concluded through video conference. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- “1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has erred in passing the ex-parte order without giving Shri Gopi Lal Bairwa vs. ITO opportunity to the assessee of being heard which is void-ab-initio deserves to be quashed. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 19,00,000/- made by the learned AO on account of alleged cash deposited in the bank accounts.”
The assessee is an individual and retired Government teacher.
The assessee filed his return of income on 31.05.2010 declaring total income of Rs. 3,04,534/- which was processed U/s 143(1) of the Act on 20.01.2011 and subsequently the case of the assessee was taken for scrutiny and notice U/s 143(2) was issued on 19.06.2012. During the course of scrutiny assessment, the AO noted that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 19,50,000/- in the Bank account of the assessee.
The AO asked the assessee to explain the source of the cash deposit in the bank. The assessee claimed that a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- is his saving from tuition fee and another Rs. 8,00,000/- loan taken from various persons and the remaining amount is his agriculture income as well as saving from salary income of the assessee. The AO was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee and made the addition of Rs. 19,00,000/- to the total income of the assessee on account of undisclosed income from other sources. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the ld. CIT(A) however, the ld. CIT(A) 2 Shri Gopi Lal Bairwa vs. ITO dismissed the appeal of the assessee while passing the ex-parte impugned order.
Before the Tribunal the ld. AR has reiterated its contentions as raised before the AO and submitted that the assessee has duly explained the source of deposit in the bank account as the assessee was having tuition income for past several years, therefore, a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- deposited in the bank account from the tuition income of the assessee. The source of balance amount is lease rental received by the assessee for agricultural land given on lease and various withdrawals from GPF loan, State Insurance, arrears of salary etc. as well as dairy income of Rs. 3,00,000/-. The ld. AR has referred to the affidavit of the assessee dated 02.10.2018 in support of explanation of source of deposit. He has also referred to the revenue record to show the agricultural land holding of the assessee and his family members.
Thus the ld. AR has submitted that when the assessee has produced all the documentary evidence before the AO to explain the source of deposit the addition made by the AO is not satisfied and the same may be deleted.
On the other hand, the ld. DR has objected to the contention of the ld. AR and submitted that the assessee has failed to produce any Shri Gopi Lal Bairwa vs. ITO supporting documentary evidence to show that the income of the assessee other than the salary income. The assessee has never shown these income on account tuition fees as well as agricultural income in his return of income, therefore, this is only after thought self serving the story concocted by the assessee. The ld. DR has further contended that affidavit filed by the assessee before the tribunal was not provided before the authorities below not produced any documentary evidence before the ld. CIT(A) despite various opportunities as the assessee did not attained the hearing before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the ld. DR has submitted that when the assessee has not bothered to appear before the ld. CIT(A) then the affidavit filed by the assessee at this stage cannot be accepted.
We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee has not appeared before the ld. CIT(A) despite 7 to 8 opportunities given by the ld. CIT(A) and finally the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex-parte order without giving finding on the merits. Further, the assessee has now filed an affidavit dated 02.10.2018 which was not available before the AO as it is prepared after assessment order passed by the Assessing Shri Gopi Lal Bairwa vs. ITO Officer. Since the assessee never appeared before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the said affidavit was not even produced before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice we set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and grant one more opportunity to the assessee to present his case before the ld. CIT(A) and produce all the relevant documentary evidence. After considering the documentary evidence if any filed by the assessee as well as giving an opportunity of hearing the ld. CIT(A) shall decide the appeal of the assessee afresh on merits.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30/06/2020.
Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; iky jko½ ¼foØe flag ;kno½ (Vikram Singh Yadav) (Vijay Pal Rao) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 30/06/2020. *Santosh. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Gopi Lal Bairwa, Tonk. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward, Tonk. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत. 5