SHRI KAMLESH KUMAR AGRAWAL,INDORE vs. ITO 5 (5), INDORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 260/IND/2018Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 December 20197 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO and CIT(A) failed to provide the assessee an opportunity for cross-examination of the evidence collected from M/s. Lumbi Pumps Pvt. Ltd., violating the principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 5,37,103/- based on TCS details from M/s. Lumbi Pumps Pvt. Ltd. for a sale of flat. The assessee denied entering into this transaction, stating it was a sale of scrap.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO without providing an opportunity for cross-examination to the assessee violates the principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 131,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE “SMC” BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT

For Appellant: Shri A.G. Shastri, A.R
For Respondent: Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.D.R
Hearing: 27.11.2019Pronounced: 10.12.2019

Appellant by Shri A.G. Shastri, A.R. Respondent by Shri K.G. Goyal, Sr.D.R. Date of Hearing: 27.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 10.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: This appeal by the assessee is against order of the CIT(A)-2, Bhopal dated 13.12.2017 pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

2.

The only effective ground is against sustaining addition of Rs.5,37,103/-. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act’) was framed vide order dated 18.2.2015. While framing the assessment, the A.O. noticed that as per the 26AS details of assessee M/s. Lumbi Pumps Pvt. Ltd. having TAN No.BPLK03555G has collected TCS of Rs.5,371/- for transaction of Rs.5,37,103/- on 26.3.2012 being sale of flat to the assessee but during assessment proceedings, the assessee denied of having entered into such transaction.

To verify this fact summons were issued to the Principal Officer of Lumbi Pumps Pvt. Ltd. In pursuance to the summon u/s 131 of the Act, Shri Virender Singh Rajput, Accountant attended and filed reply. It was reiterated that company has sold scrap to the assessee. On the basis of this, the A.O. made addition of Rs.5,37,103/-. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who sustained this addition. Against this, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that before authorities below, the assessee had categorically denied of having entered into such transaction. Further, he submitted that the A.O. without confronting and giving opportunity of cross examination to the assessee made addition. Hence, there is a clear violation of principle of natural justice.

3.

Per contra, Ld. D.R. opposed these submissions.

4.

I have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Undisputedly, the assessee has disputed of having entered into the cash transaction with M/s. Lumbi Pumps Pvt. Ltd. Further, an affidavit has been filed by the assessee denying of having purchases of scraps from M/s. Lumbi Pumps Pvt. Ltd. the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue in para Nos.5.1 & 5.2 observing as under:

5.

Since the A.O. had collected certain evidence from M/s. Lumbi Pumps Pvt. Ltd., it was incumbent upon the authorities below to confront the assessee and grant him cross examination to sub-serve the interest of principles of natural justice. I therefore, set aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue to the file of the A.O. to decide it afresh after giving opportunity of cross

examination to the assessee. Grounds raised in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order was pronounced in the open court on 10.12.2019.

More judgments on Section 131

All 4,706 judgments and leading authorities on Section 131 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →