PALANISAMY BUVANARANI,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, CHE-W-(65)(92), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 375/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 April 2023AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the principle of natural justice, decided to grant the assessee another opportunity to substantiate their claim. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee was subjected to an addition of Rs. 30 Lacs on account of cash deposits in a bank account. The assessee claimed the cash was from agricultural land sale and past savings, but failed to provide documentary evidence. The appellate authority confirmed the addition due to non-compliance with hearing notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made on account of unexplained cash deposits is sustainable without proper substantiation by the assessee, and if a further opportunity should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM, & HON’BLE SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 07-02-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Act on 15-09-2021. In the assessment order, the assessee was saddled with addition of Rs.30 Lacs on account of cash deposit made in certain bank account.

1.

2 - The assessee submitted that the cash was deposited out of income and sale of agricultural land by husband and also out of past savings. In the absence of any documentary evidences, the explanation was rejected. During appellate proceedings, the hearing notices remained un-complied with which led to confirmation of impugned addition. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

Before us, Ld. AR has pleaded for another opportunity and undertook to file the requisite details in support of the claim. The Ld. Sr. DR opposed any interference in the impugned order.

3.

We find that the impugned addition has been made since the assessee could not file the supporting documents. However, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to provide another opportunity to the assessee and therefore, restore the impugned disallowance to the file of Ld. AO with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its claim.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 26th April, 2023.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →