Loading judgment…
Facts
Cash of ₹10,50,000 was seized from the assessee during the Assam General Election. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions of ₹6,46,430 and ₹1,96,000 to the assessee's income, which were confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee claimed the amounts were received from LIC premiums and sale of vehicles.
Held
The Tribunal noted that summons issued to the persons who provided the cash for LIC premiums and vehicle sale were not complied with. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination of these individuals.
Key Issues
Validity of additions made by the AO on account of unexplained cash and the failure to comply with summons issued to third parties.
Sections Cited
69A, 132A, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI
Before: SHRIDUVVURU RL REDDY, VP & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Central NER, Guwahati (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 21.12.2023 for the AY 2021-22.
At the outset, we observe that the appeal is delayed by 568 days. The assessee has filed the condonation petition explaining the delay in filing the appeal. After taking into account the reasons cited for the delay, we are of the view that the delay in filing the appeal is for genuine and bonafide reasons and consequently the same is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.
The facts in brief are that the cash amount of ₹10,50,000/- was from seized from the assessee by State Surveillance Team on 04.03.2021, after the assessee was intercepted during the course of Assam General Election 2021. Warrant of authorization u/s 132A of the Act was issued and cash was requisitioned on 11.03.2021, from the concerned authority. Thereafter, the assessee filed the return of income showing total income at ₹4,91,250/-. The statutory notices along with questionnaire were issued which were replied by the assessee by submitting the source of cash deposits. The ld. AO finally partly accepted the submission of the assessee. However, the contention of the assessee is that ₹6,45,400/- was received from the four persons on account of LIC premium and ₹1,96,000/- from sale of cars. The contentions of the assessee were not accepted and accordingly addition was made to the income of the assessee in the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 22.09.2022.
In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the order of the ld. AO on both the issues.
After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that though the assessee has submitted that the money was received from 4 individual as LIC premium and also from sale of cars. We note that ₹6,46,430/- was stated to be received from 4 LIC holders, whereas ₹1,96,000/- was stated to be received from sale of vehicle. However, we note that the summons
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.