BALARAM MHATRE,DOMBIVLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 921/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the AO made a protective addition without specifying the year for substantive addition. Given the assessee's submission that the amount was already added in an earlier year, the matter was restored to the AO to verify facts and decide afresh after the outcome of the decision for AY 2018-19.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the reopening of assessment under Section 147 and an addition of Rs. 33,58,000/- under Section 69C for AY 2019-20. The assessee argued that a similar addition was already made for AY 2018-19 and the AO made a protective addition without adjudicating on merit.

What were the issues?

Validity of reopening under Section 147 when a similar addition was already made in a prior year and whether the AO's protective addition was justified without substantive adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 69C,Section 254(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless 1.

1.

Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) dated 1301.2025 for the A.Y. 2019-20.Though the assessee has raised multiple grounds of appeal, however, in our considered view, the substantial grounds of appeal relates to validity of reopening under section 147 and the addition of Rs.33,58,000/- made under section 69C in the assessment order dated 12.02.2024.

2.

Rival submissions of Learned Authorised Representative (Ld.AR) of the assessee and Learned Senior Departmental Representative (Sr. DR) have been heard and record perused. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that case of assessee for AY 2019-20 was reopened on the basis of information that assessee purchased immovable property form GNP Group and made payment of on money of Rs. 38,58,000/-. The assessee objected to the reopening and besides other submissions, the assessee submitted that addition of similar amount has already been made in AY 2018-19, which is subject matter of further appeal before ld CIT(A). The Assessing Officer (AO) proceeded for assessment and made addition of Rs. 38,58,000/- on protective basis. On further appeal before ld CIT(A), the action of AO was upheld in ex-parte order. The ld CIT(A) not adjudicated the grounds of appeal on merit despite the facts that the assessee filed his detailed submissions and various evidence on 15.04.2024, copy of screen shot of ITBA portal is filed. The ld AR of the assessee submits that once the additions of similar amount was added in earlier year, it cannot be added again, so the assessment order may be quashed. The ld AR of the assessee in alternative submissions and in all his fairness submits that the matter may be restored back to the file of Jurisdictional AO to verify such facts and to pass order after order in appeal for AY 2018-19.

3. On the other hand, Sr. DR for the revenue supported the orders of lower authorities and would submits that the addition is to be made in the year in which the assessee made payment of impugned money to GNP Group. On the alternative submissions the ld Sr DR for the revenue submits that he has no objection if the matter is restored back to the file of AO.

4. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that the AO made addition of Rs. 38,58,000/- under section 69B on protective basis. We find that the stand of the assessee even before AO was that the same amount has already been added in earlier year. Despite recording such fact, the AO has not countered such fact and made addition by taking view that as per information available with him the assessee has made cash payment in AY 2019-20. The ld CIT(A) confirmed the action of AO in ex-parte order. On considering the peculiar facts of the case that the AO has made protective addition without specifying the facts as to in which year the substantive addition is made, the matter is restored back to the file of jurisdictional AO to verify the fact and if similar amount is added in AY 2018-19, passed order afresh after outcome of decision in AY 2018-

19.

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 05th May, 2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →