SANJAY TEJKARAN AGARWAL,THANE(WEST) vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, THANE , THANE (WEST)

| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ायपीठ, मुंबई |
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“G” BENCH, MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT
&
SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A. No. 4514/Mum/2024
Assessment Year: 2014-15

Sanjay Tejkaran Agarwal
A/803, Monarch Ashar Residency
Pokharan Road No.02
Vasant Vihar
Thane (W)
Maharashtra - 400610
[PAN: AGPPA7098B]

Vs
Dy. CIT, Circle-3, Thane
अपीलाथ/ (Appellant)
 यथ/ (Respondent)

Assessee by :
Shri M. Subramanian – Advocate
Revenue by :
Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 11/02/2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 11/02/2025

आदेश/O R D E R

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated
04/07/2024 by NFAC, Delhi pertaining to AY 2014-15. 2. The grievance of the assessee relates to the addition on account of cash deposit in the bank account and unsecured loan u/s 68 of the Act.
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 30/11/2014 declaring total income of Rs.
25,38,809/-. The return was selected for scrutiny assessment under CASS and accordingly statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the AO noticed deposits in the bank account on various dates amounting to Rs.1,22,99,800/-. On receiving no plausible reply, the same was treated as unexplained cash credit and added to the income u/s 68 of the Act.

I.T.A. No. 4514/Mum/2024

The AO further noticed that the assessee has taken loan from Smt.
Durgadevi Agrawal amounting to Rs.20,00,000/-. The assessee was asked to furnish details and again on receiving no plausible reply, the same was treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and added to the income of the assessee. Interest paid on this loan amount was also added.
4. Assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) and furnished additional evidence. The additional evidences were admitted by the ld.
CIT(A) and a remand report was called for from the AO. However, the AO did not submit the same and the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal confirming the addition.
5. We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. We find that the additional evidence/supporting evidence furnished by the assessee were not examined by any of the authorities below. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fairplay, we deem it fit to restore the issues to the file of the AO. The assessee is directed to furnish evidence and the AO is directed to examine the same and decide the issues afresh after affording the assessee reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard.
6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 11th February, 2025 at Mumbai. (SAKTIJIT DEY)

(NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA)
VICE-PRESIDENT

ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated 11/02/2025
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs

I.T.A. No. 4514/Mum/2024

आदेश की ितिलिप अेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to :

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,