Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B” : PUNE
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE
ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012- 2013, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short [the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056082629(1), dated 14.09.2023, involving proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities i.e., Assessing Officer and the 2 ITA.No.1188/PUN/2023 CIT(A), in the assessment herein dated 16.11.2019 as well as in the lower appellate discussion, respectively, have held the assessee’s alleged cash deposits of Rs.57,69,500/- as unexplained u/sec.69A of the Act. It is in this factual backdrop that the assessee’s case before us is that not only the foregoing impugned assessment had been wrongly framed ex-parte but also the lower appellate discussion has failed to take note of its various adjournment petitions before confirming the impugned addition.
Learned counsel first of all sought to invite our attention to the fact that the assessee had duly submitted it’s adjournment letters before the CIT(A)'s which have nowhere been considered whilst confirming the impugned addition ex-parte. This is stated to be coupled with the fact that the lower appellate discussion has neither framed any point(s) of determination nor is there any detailed adjudication as per sec.250(6) as it is evident from a perusal of the corresponding findings from para-4 onwards. Our attention is further invited to the assessee’s paper book running into 70 pages explaining of the impugned cash deposits as well as the adjournment letters filed before the CIT(A).
3 ITA.No.1188/PUN/2023 4. The Revenue’s stand on the other hand draws strong support from both the learned lower authorities action making the impugned addition.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing sole substantive issue involved in the instant appeal regarding unexplained cash deposits made in the assessee’s account. We make it clear that this assessee is a trust running educational institution(s) imparting education to pupils in various classes. And that it’s stand before us attributes source of it’s cash deposits representing tuition fee collected from the said students only. We keep in mind all these facts and deem it appropriate in larger interest of justice that the CIT(A) needs to re-examine the entire issue afresh within three effective opportunities of hearing so as to enable the assessee to file all the relevant details explaining source of it’s cash deposits at its own risk and responsibility. This entire exercise may be completed within three effective opportunities in consequential proceedings. We order accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.
4 ITA.No.1188/PUN/2023 Order pronounced in the open Court on 13.12.2023.