SUNIL KUMAR PATNALU,BERHAMPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2, BERHAMPUR

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.347/CTK/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Sunil Kumar Patnalu, Vs ITO, Ward-2, Berhampur Flat No.301, Nandighosh Atrium Apartment, Beside, Max Mall, Berhampur-760001 PAN No. :AHHPP 9609 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 13/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 13/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 31.03.2023, passed in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1051777043(1) for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 177 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition along with affidavit, which is not found to be false. The reason given in the affidavit is in respect of medical problem. Consequently, the delay of 177 days in filing the present appeal is condoned and the appeal is heard finally. 4. It was submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that the assessment was taken for scrutiny as there was large cash deposits during the demonetisation period and after verification it was found that there is a deposit of

2 ITA No.347/CTK/2023 Rs.4,05,000/- in the bank account of the assessee which the assessee has mentioned that the said amount was received from Shri Jagannath Mohapatra. However, the address and details of Shri Jagannath Mohapatra was not submitted by the assessee, which has resulted into the addition as made by the AO. In appeal before the ld. CIT(A), also the details were not produced. It was the submission that the order of the ld. AO and the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be upheld. 5. I have considered the submissions of ld. Sr.DR. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly show that in para 8 of the order, the ld. CIT(A) has mentioned that only a confirmation letter has been produced and no further details of Shri Jagannath Mohapatra was produced. In these circumstances, in the interest of justice, so as to grant the assessee another opportunity to prove the credit of Rs.4,05,000/-, issues in this appeal are restored to the file of AO for readjudication and examination. The assessee is directed to produce the details before the AO to prove the alleged loan taken from Shri Jagannath Mohapatra. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 13/03/2024. Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 13/03/2024 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.

3 ITA No.347/CTK/2023 आदेश की प्रनतलऱपऩ अग्रेपषत/Cop.y of the Order forwarded to : 1. अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant- Sunil Kumar Patnalu, Flat No.301, Nandighosh Atrium Apartment, Beside, Max Mall, Berhampur-760001 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- ITO, Ward-2, Berhampur आयकर आयुक्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A), 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. ववभागीय प्रयतयनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक / DR, 5. ITAT, Cuttack गार्ज पाईऱ / Guard file. 6. सत्यावऩत प्रयत //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

(Assistant Registrar) आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack