OSS PRASAD, HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, HYD, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 951/HYD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 October 2020AY 2005-063 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal remanded the appeals back to the CIT(A) to allow the assessee an opportunity to present all relevant documents. The penalty appeals were also remanded to be adjudicated after the quantum appeals.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against quantum additions for unexplained investments and penalties for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2010-11. The assessee had provided details to the AO but failed to do so before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to present documents before the CIT(A) for proper appreciation of facts and whether penalty appeals should be remanded along with quantum appeals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad

Before: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Hearing: 01/10/2020Pronounced: 06/10/2020

ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. All these are assessee’s appeals for the A.Ys 2005-06 to 2010-11 against the quantum additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) and confirmed by the CIT(A), and also against the penalty levied by the AO u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T.Act, 1961 for unexplained investments and confirmed by the CIT(A) for AYs 2006-07 to 2009-10.

1.

All the appeals were taken up for hearing through video conferencing on 01.10.2020 and both the parties were heard.

2.

The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the additions are made on account of unexplained investments and the assessee had filed all the details before the AO but could not file the same before the CIT(A) for various reasons. He therefore prayed for an opportunity to file all

ITA Nos. 951 to 955/H/15 (Ays: 2005-06 to 2009-10) ITA 1688/H/2016 (AY 2010-11) to 64/H/2015 (AYs: 2006-07 to 2009-10) Sri OSS Prasad, Hyderabad the relevant information before the CIT(A) in the interest of justice as verification of the documents is required for proper appreciation of facts.

2.1. He further submitted that if the quantum appeals are remanded, the penalty appeals may also be remanded to the file of CIT(A), due to which the CIT(A) was constrained to confirm the additions.

2.2. Ld.DR submitted that in spite of several opportunities the assessee had not filed the details before the CIT(A).

3.

Having regard to rival contentions and material placed on record, we find that the assessee had filed all the details before the AO and it is only after considering the same that the AO has made additions towards unexplained investments in lands. Before the CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal but did not file any of the documents on which he placed reliance, due to which the CIT(A) was constrained to confirm the assessment orders. However, in the interest of justice, we feel that the assessee should be given another opportunity to present all the documents before the CIT(A), so that the CIT(A) can appreciate the merits of the case and decide the case in accordance with law. In view of the same, all the quantum appeals for the A.Ys 2005-06 to 2010-11 are remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to file all the details before the CIT(A) within one month of receipt of this order and thereafter, the CIT(A) shall decide the appeals on merits. Needless to mention that the assessee shall be given fair opportunity of hearing.

3.1. Since the quantum appeals have been remitted to the file of CIT(A), the penalty appeals in to 64/H/2015 are also remitted to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the same if found necessary, after adjudicating the quantum appeals.

ITA Nos. 951 to 955/H/15 (Ays: 2005-06 to 2009-10) ITA 1688/H/2016 (AY 2010-11) to 64/H/2015 (AYs: 2006-07 to 2009-10) Sri OSS Prasad, Hyderabad

4.

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

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 06th October, 2020.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →