MRS. PRAVATI SAHOO,NARANPUR, KEONJHARGARH vs. ITO, WARD KEONJHAR, KEONJHAR

Shri Bivash Ranjan Panda, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee had made payment for pension policy premium for the earlier years being AYs.2009- 10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 and had also claimed the rebate u/s.80C of the Act. The assessee had surrendered the pension plan policy before normal date of maturity. Consequently, the AO had treated the entire sum of Rs.31,32,699/- as income from other sources. It was further submitted that before the ld. CIT(A), the claim was specifically explained but the ld. CIT(A) took the stand that the proof in respect of premium having paid 2 over a period of 3 years was not produced. It was the submission that if one opportunity is granted, the assessee will be able to produce the evidence before the AO.

In reply, ld. Sr. DR submitted that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) should be upheld.

I have considered the rival submissions. The assessee has now placed before me proof representing the premium payment on 17.11.2009, 09.11.2010 & 30.11.2011. These are for the amounts of Rs.12,00,000/-, Rs.9,00,000/- & Rs.9,00,000/-, respectively. As the assessee does possess the receipts of the same, in the interest of justice, the issue is restored to the file of AO for readjudication and examination of the evidences after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

I am not adjudicating the legal ground as raised by the assessee and the same is left open as the issue has been restored to the file of AO for readjudication on merits.

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. (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 13/03/2024 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.