ABHIJIT PRAMOD SARDESAI,RATNAGIRI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RATNAGIRI CIRCLE, RATNAGIRI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2936/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2019AY 2009-104 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the AO. The AO is directed to decide the issue afresh after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 24,41,084/- for cash deposited in the bank account. The CIT(A) restricted the addition to Rs. 17,13,050/- after allowing relief for cheque transactions.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity of hearing at the assessment stage to explain the source of cash deposits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Shingte
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali

PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-2, Kolhapur on 4-10-2017 in relation to the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

There is a delay of 5 days in presenting the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed affidavit in support of the condonation of delay. I am satisfied with such reasons. As such, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing on merits.

2 ITA No.2936/PUN/2017 Abhijit Pramod Sardesai

3.

The only issue raised in this appeal is against the

confirmation of addition of Rs.17,13,050/- being cash deposited

in bank account.

4.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Assessing

Officer (AO) got information about the assessee having

deposited cash in his bank account to the tune of Rs.24,41,084/-.

In the absence of the assessee presenting his side on the issue,

the AO made an addition for the said sum. The ld. CIT(A)

allowed part relief in respect of the sources explained by the

assessee for transactions through cheque entries. That is how,

the addition got restricted to the extent of Rs.17,13,050/-

representing cash deposits in the bank account. The assessee is

aggrieved by the confirmation of addition to that extent.

5.

I have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant

material on record. It is seen that the assessment order was

passed ex parte qua the assessee. The ld. AR submitted that an

inadequate opportunity of hearing was allowed at the assessment

stage for enabling the assessee to furnish evidence in support of

genuineness and source of bank deposits. It was, therefore,

prayed that one more opportunity be granted. No serious

3 ITA No.2936/PUN/2017 Abhijit Pramod Sardesai

objection was taken by the ld. DR. In the given circumstances

and without going into the merits of the addition, I set-aside the

impugned order to this extent and remit the matter to the file of

AO for deciding this issue afresh as per law after allowing a

reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03rd May, 2019.

Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) उपा�य�/ VICE PRESIDENT उपा�य� उपा�य� उपा�य�

पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 03rd May, 2019 सतीश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत आदेश आदेश आदेश अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 2. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / 3. The CIT (Appeals)-2, Kolhapur 4. The Pr. CIT-2, Kolhapur िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “SMC” / 5. DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. // True copy // आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार

// True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

ITA No.2936/PUN/2017 Abhijit Pramod Sardesai

Date 1. Draft dictated on 02-05-2019 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 02-05-2019 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed JM before the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved JM by Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to Sr.PS the Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →