ISHWAR SINGH,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2657/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 September 2021AY 2009-104 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the issue to the AO, directing him to examine the claim afresh with supporting evidence. The assessee was given an opportunity to furnish necessary documents and be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited Rs. 57.80 lacs in his savings bank account. The AO made an addition for this amount as no plausible explanation was provided. The assessee claimed the deposit was from the sale of agricultural land owned by his mother.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO for unexplained cash deposits in a bank account is justified. Whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to explain the source of the deposit with supporting evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

Hearing: 08/09/2021Pronounced: 08/09/2021

PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Noida dated 28.03.2017 pertaining to A.Y.2009-10.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.57.80 lacs being cash deposit in the Savings Bank account. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per the information received by the AO it came to his notice that the assessee has deposited Rs.57.80 lacs in his savings bank account with Oriental Bank of Commerce.

4.

The assessee was asked to explain the course of cash deposited by him. On receiving no plausible reply the AO made the addition of Rs. 57.80 lacs by an exparte order framed u/s. 144 of the Act.

5.

Assessee assailed the addition before the CIT(A) and strongly contended that the deposit in the bank account was out of the proceeds of the sale of agricultural land owned by the mother of the assessee in support sale deed was furnished.

6.

Though the first appellate authority accepted the sale transaction but found some conflicting facts in the sale deed and without asking for any clarification from the assessee confirmed the addition.

7.

Before us the counsel for the assessee stated that the entire deposit is explained by the sale proceeds of the agricultural land though the transaction could not be explained properly before the lower authority and pleaded for set aside.

8.

The DR did not raise any objection.

9.

We are of the considered view that the assessee should get one more opportunity to explain the transaction with supporting evidence. We accordingly set aside the issue to the files of the AO. The AO is directed to examine the claim fresh and the assessee is directed to furnish necessary supporting evidences. Needless to mention the AO shall give reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

10.

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

11.

Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both the representatives on 08.09.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →