AMOL SHRIDHAR CHOUGULE,SHIROL vs. ITO, WARD 1, ICHALKARANJI, ICHALKARANJI

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the addition of Rs.1,84,27,945/- made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained money u/s 69A, Rs.16,83,263/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of commission income and Rs.33,220/- made by the Assessing Officer towards fees received from professional / technical fees.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual. Information was available with the department that the assessee has made cash deposit of Rs.3,68,55,890/- in his current bank account with Central Bank of India and the assessee has not filed his return of income for the relevant assessment year. The Assessing Officer, therefore, issued notice u/s 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 21.03.2022 to the assessee. However, the assessee did not respond to the said notice. Since the assessee has not made any compliance, therefore, notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2022 after passing the order u/s 148A(d). After considering the reply given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer proposed addition of Rs.1,84,27,945/-. Subsequently, notice u/s 143(2) was issued and served on the assessee. Thereafter, notice u/s 142(1) along with a questionnaire was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee submitted its reply which reads as under:

However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the arguments advanced by the assessee in absence of complete documentary evidence to substantiate his claim. He, therefore, held that the assessee failed to furnish

The Assessing Officer similarly, in absence of any satisfactory explanation, made addition of Rs.16,83,263/- towards commission earned. The Assessing Officer also made addition of Rs.33,220/- being the fees received for professional / technical services from M/s. One97 Communication in absence of proper explanation.

In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed all the three grounds raised by the assessee by observing as under:

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that identical issues have arose in the immediately preceding assessment years and the Assessing Officer after considering the submissions made by the assessee has not made any addition, copy of which is placed at pages 142 to 144 of the paper book. He submitted that the Assessing Officer without appreciating the facts properly has made additions during this year which have been upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. He submitted that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to reconcile the amount of Rs.1,84,27,945/- made by the assessee in the bank account and also the other two additions.

The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has passed a detailed order giving reasons while sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer. He accordingly submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC be upheld.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and have gone through the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case made 3 additions namely addition of Rs.1,84,27,945/- being the unexplained money u/s 69A, Rs.16,83,263/- being the commission income and Rs.33,220/- on account of fees received for professional / technical services. We find the above 3 additions have been sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the reasons of which have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. A perusal of the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s 143(3) on 13.11.2019 for assessment year 2017-18, copy of which is placed at pages 142 to 144 of the paper book shows that the Assessing Officer, after considering the sales commission, turnover etc has accepted the return of income and has not made any addition. Under these circumstances and considering the submissions made by the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer regarding all the 3 issues challenged in the appeal, we, in the interest of justice, restore the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to adjudicate the same

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