Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the confirmation of an addition of Rs. 66.94 Lacs representing cash deposits. The assessee claimed the cash was from sales of cattle and cash gifts, but failed to provide sufficient documentary evidence to the lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal noted the lack of documentary evidence provided by the assessee to substantiate the source of cash deposits. While acknowledging the need for natural justice, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of cash deposits to the assessee's income was justified without sufficient documentary evidence from the assessee, and whether a fresh opportunity to present evidence should be granted.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 22-08-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) of the Act on 17-12-2018. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of cash deposits of Rs.66.94 Lacs. The registry has noted delay of 337 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee on the strength of condonation petition which is accompanied by an affidavit of the assessee. It has been stated that the impugned order did not come to the knowledge of the assessee in time. Considering the same, we condone the delay and proceed for adjudication of the appeal on merits.
From case records, it emerges that the case of the assesses was reopened to examine the source of cash deposits of Rs.73,81,838/- in SBI, Naraingarh branch. The assessee furnished some explanations. The Ld. AO, after granting benefit of self-withdrawals for Rs.6,87,500/-, added the remaining amount of Rs.66,94,338/- to the income of the assessee.
During first appeal, the assessee, inter-alia, stated that the said account was held jointly with his wife Mrs. Nita Devi who was engaged in business of milk producing cattle in the village. The cash was sourced out of sale proceeds. Further, the assessee received cash gifts of Rs.8 Lacs from close relatives which was evidenced by their affidavits. The source of Rs.8 Lacs stood accepted by Ld. CIT(A) whereas the remaining addition including commission income of Rs.61,338/- was confirmed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.
It is quite clear that the assessee did not fil documentary evidences before lower authorities to substantiate the sources of cash deposits. Though submissions were made to explain the sources, no plausible documents could be furnished in support of the same. Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee before Ld. CIT(A) to plead and prove its case forthwith. Accordingly, the appeal stands restored back to Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate his case.
The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 06th April, 2026.