PRAGNESH RAMESHBHAI PANDYA,KHEDA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, NADIAD

Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and has not filed the Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2015-16. Information received in the Insight portal that the assessee has purchased an immovable property for Rs.62,00,000/- and made cash deposit in Bank of Baroda of Rs.52,00,000/- during the Financial Year 2014-15. Therefore a show cause notice u/s. 148 A(b) was issued to explain the above transactions. The assessee responded that he does not have bank account with Bank of Baroda. Whereas he had three fixed deposits with Bank of Baroda which were pre-closed on 28-04-2014 and 07-01-2015 receptively. Thus there is no cash deposit to the tune of Rs.52,00,000/- in Bank of Baroda.

Therefore notice u/s. 148 was issued to the assessee on 31-03-2022 requesting to file the return. The assessee not responded to this 148 notice also. The assessee not filed Return of Income in response to notice u/s. 148, the Assessing Officer called for an information u/s. 133(6) from the Sub-Registrar and also from Bank of Baroda thereby made addition of Rs.52,00,000/- by observing as follows: 1. During the concerned A.Y. i.e. 2015-16 the assessee neither filed original ITR nor in compliance to Notice 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The notices u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were issued 11.11.2022 and 17.01.2023, but the assessee neither provided any submission regarding his source of income, Nature of business, information about the cash transaction and the bank statements of the concerned A.Y. nor submitted any documentary evidences in this regard. 3. Details of the Bank accounts of assessee is received that there are 3 Bank Accounts in the name of the assessee at DABHAN, GUJARAT bearing account nos. 03030300011808, 03030300011809, 03030300011810. It is also submitted that the accounts were opened on 17.08.2013 and were clsoed on 28.04.2014, 28.04.2014 and 07.01.2015 respectively. In reply submitted in response to notice u/s 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the assessee had stated that he doesn't have the said bank account during the said period and also categorically denied any transaction/cash deposits through these bank

Aggrieved against the reassessment order, assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the assessee is submitted that the reopening of assessment passed on third party information received from Insight portal and without independent verification, enquiry and non-application of mind by the A.O. is bad in law and liable to be quashed. The three bank account No 03030300011808, 03030300011809, 03030300011 are not regular savings or current accounts, but are Fixed Deposit (FD) accounts held jointly by the assessee with his spouse, Smt. Sejal Pragneshkumar Pandya. The details of these FDs are as follows:

The Ld. CIT(A) considered the above submissions however confirmed the addition by observing as follows: 7.2 The appellant has contended that He has not maintained any account in Bank of India, and that the three bank accounts referred to by the AD were Fixed Deposit (FD) accounts which were subsequently closed The cash deposit of 152.00.000/- in Bank of Baroda was made by Mrs. S. P. Pandya in her account bearing number 03030100002719, IFSC BARB0DABHAN, and therefore, the deposit should not be brought to tax in the hands of the appellant. 7.3 From the appellant's own statement, it is admitted that the amount was deposited in the aforementioned account belonging to or operated by Mrs. S. P. Pandya. However, since the Insight portal flagged this transaction in the appellant's name, and the appellant has not denied being a joint holder or having an association with the said account, it is reasonable to infer that the appellant is either a primary or joint holder in the account In such a case, the onus is on the appellant to furnish satisfactory and conclusive evidence regarding The ownership of the funds.

Aggrieved against the appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal:

Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted before us the information obtained under RTI from the Assessing Officer namely the notices issued u/s. 133(6) to Bank of Baroda and details of cash deposit. The information received Bank of Baroda makes it clear that the three accounts are fixed deposits opened on 17-08-2013 and closed on 28-04- 2014 and 07-01-2015 respectively. Thus the Assessing Officer is not correct making addition of Rs.52,00,000/- u/s. 68/69C of the Act and liable to be deleted.

Per contra Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue strongly submitted that the assessee has not produced the details before the Assessing Officer are the fixed deposits held in the name of assessee’s wife. Therefore the addition made by the A.O. is sustainable in law.

We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. Though the assessee has not filed the Return of Income but produced copies of Certificate from Bank of Baroda that the three accounts relating to fixed deposits opened on 17-08-2013 for Rs.5,00,000/- each and closed on 28-04-2014 and 07-01-2015 respectively. Thus the assessee has discharged its initial onus cast upon it. However the Assessing Unit under the Faceless Regime without verification of the same made addition of Rs.52,00,000/- u/s. 69A of the Act, which in our considered view is without making verification and the submission of the assessee. The RTI information furnished by the A.O. also not specified the amount of Rs. 52,00,000/- as determined by the

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed.