JYOSHNAMAYEE MISHRA,KHORDHA vs. ITO, KHORDHA WARD, KHORDHA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 316/CTK/2019Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 January 2020AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer had not conducted any exercise to determine the peak credit. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer to determine the peak credit claimed by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were filed against assessment orders passed under section 143(3)/147 of the Act. The assessee contended that since no books of account were maintained, cash deposits in the bank account could not be treated as credit from undisclosed sources, and thus no addition under Section 68 was warranted.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits in bank accounts, in the absence of maintained books of account, can be added as income under Section 68, and if so, whether the addition should be based on peak credit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

Before: SHRI

For Appellant: Shri B.V.R Swamy
For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Hearing: 09/01Pronounced: 09/01

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER to 318/CTK/201 2019 Assessment Year Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 14 & 2014-15 Jyoshnamayee Jyoshnamayee Mishra,Plot Vs. ITO, Khurda Ward, Khurda ITO, Khurda Ward, Khurda No.97, Trahi Achyuta nagar, , Trahi Achyuta nagar, Via:Balakati, Dist: Khurda Via:Balakati, Dist: Khurda PAN/GIR No. No.BATPM 4094 A (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri B.V.R Swamy B.V.R Swamy, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR Subhendu Dutta, DR Date of Hearing : 09/01/ 20 / 2020 Date of Pronouncement : 09/01 01/2020 O R D E R

These are ese are appeals filed by the assessee against the filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the CIT(A)- -1, Bhubaneswar all dated 25.7.2019 for the assessment year for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2014 to 2014-15, respectively, in the matter of assessment under , in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) 3(3)/147 of the Act.

2.

The effective ground taken in all these appeals is that the order The effective ground taken in all these appeals is that the order The effective ground taken in all these appeals is that the order under section 14 under section 143(3)/147 of the Act is erroneous and unjustified /147 of the Act is erroneous and unjustified as the orders have been passed against the orders have been passed against the principles of natural justice. principles of natural justice.

3.

At the time of hearing, ld counsel for the assessee submitted that the At the time of hearing, ld counsel for the assessee submitted that the At the time of hearing, ld counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment in all these years have been completed under section assessment in all these years have been completed under section assessment in all these years have been completed under section P a g e 1 | 3 to 318/CTK/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 143(3)/147 of the Act, which is against the principles of natural justice. Ld counsel submitted that since the assessee has not maintained books of account, therefore, cash deposited into the bank account do not represent the credit found in the books of account of the assessee and, therefore, no addition could be made under section 68 of the Act. He submitted that the deposits in the bank account cannot be the sole basis for reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act, for holding that income has escaped assessment. Ld counsel further submitted that the addition cannot be made in the facts and circumstances of the case. He submitted that, if at all any addition is required to be made, then the peak amount can be added to the income of the assessee.

4.

Replying to above, ld DR submitted that when the assessee has not disclosed the accounts of the assessee then the entire income has to be taxed in the hands of the assessee. However, in all fairness, ld D.R. submitted that the case may be restored to the file of the AO for allowing the assessee to explain the source of cash credit and determination of peak credit to be added to the income of the assessee.

5.

On careful consideration of rival submissions, first of all, I may point out that the assessment in all these years have been completed under section 143(3)/147 of the Act. The contention of ld A.R. before the Tribunal that if at all any addition is required to be made that would be the peak credit. On perusal of the assessment order, I observe that no such exercise P a g e 2 | 3 to 318/CTK/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 has been conducted by the Assessing Officer regarding computation of peak credit. We find that this issue, in any case, is to be remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer to determine the peak credit claimed by the assessee and the assessee is directed to give peak computation of these transactions. In case, assessee will not provide information on peak credits the AO will verify and frame assessment accordingly and recalculated the taxable income of the assessee accordingly.

6.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 09/01/2020.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →