Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM
आदेश / ORDER
PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM :
This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals)-1, Kolhapur dated 08.11.2017 for the assessment year 2005-06 as per grounds of appeal on record.
At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that though the assessee has taken multiple grounds of appeal before the Tribunal, however, the crux of the grievance is that the peak credit was not
2 ITA No.237/PUN/2018 A.Y.2005-06
calculated properly by the Revenue Authorities and therefore, he prayed that
the matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper
calculation of peak credit.
The relevant facts in respect of the submissions made by the Ld. AR
before us are that the assessee being individual derived income from
commission on activity as subagent of Shri R.R. Gorle for grapes and also
from agricultural activity. On the basis of AIR information in possession, the
Assessing Officer noticed that there was cash deposits to the tune of
Rs.34,82,783/- in the bank account of the assessee during the year under
consideration. Therefore, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.142(1) of the
Act on 24.08.2007 and in response to the notice, the assessee filed return of
income for assessment year 2005-06 declaring total income of Rs.43,900/-
along with agricultural income of Rs. Nil. After hearing the assessee and
considering his submissions, the Assessing Officer assessed income of the
assessee at Rs.13,87,783/- vide order dated 31.12.2007 on the basis of peak
credit. According to the assessee, there was an error in arriving at the peak
credit. He approached the Assessing Officer for rectification. The Assessing
Officer Ward 1(4), Sangli vide his order u/s.154 dated 27.06.2008 disposed
off assessee’s request for rectification with the remark that “it is seen that
disallowance of Rs.13,87,783/- on account of unexplained peak deposits in
bank account had been made after verifying facts since the assessee failed to
explain the sources of deposits made in the bank account. The facts are
discussed at length in the body of assessment order u/s.143(3) of the I.T.Act
dated 13.12.2007. It is also seen that the assessee has already preferred an
appeal against the said order before the CIT(A), Kolhapur. Hence, it is not
mistake apparent from the records. Under these circumstances no rectification
3 ITA No.237/PUN/2018 A.Y.2005-06
is possible in the issue raised in the application. Therefore, the assessee’s
application for rectification of mistake is hereby rejected and filed accordingly.”
Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred
appeal before the Ld. CIT(Appeals). The Ld. CIT(Appeals) after considering the
facts, submissions of the assessee and the assessment order made certain
concessions on the peak credit as calculated by the Assessing Officer and
partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.
That in response to the opening submissions made by the Ld. AR of the
assessee as hereinabove mentioned, the Ld. DR per contra, placed strong
reliance on the order of Sub-ordinate Authorities, however, agreeing on the
proposition of restoration of the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer.
We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. The
Assessing Officer has calculated peak credit in the case of assessee and
thereafter, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has made some concessions in the calculation
of the peak credit and have given part relief to the assessee. That before us,
submissions of the Ld. AR is that the calculation of the peak credit by the
Revenue Authorities was not properly carried out and it needs re-verification.
It is the prayer of the Ld. AR for restoring the matter back to the file of
Assessing Officer for proper calculation of the peak credit. The Ld. DR
conceded to the request made by the Ld. AR.
In the interest of justice, we are of the considered view that the order of
the Ld. CIT(Appeals) should be set aside and the matter may be restored back
to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper calculation of peak credit. We
order accordingly. Needless to say, the Assessing Officer shall grant
reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
4 ITA No.237/PUN/2018 A.Y.2005-06
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7.
Order pronounced on 18th day of March, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- R.S.SYAL PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 18th March, 2019. SB आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(Appeals)-1, Kolhapur. 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Kolhapur. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक-सद�य” ब�च, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6.
// True Copy // आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
�नजी स�चव / Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
5 ITA No.237/PUN/2018 A.Y.2005-06
Date 1 Draft dictated on 18.03.2019 Sr.PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 18.03.2019 Sr.PS/PS 3 Draft proposed and placed JM/AM before the second Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by AM/JM second Member 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of order Sr.PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr.PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order