Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 40 days, which was condoned by the Tribunal. The Assessing Officer had completed the assessment under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, treating cash credits and withdrawals as unexplained income. The CIT(A) had confirmed these additions.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the assessee's petition for additional evidence and the submissions of the DR, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with an opportunity for the assessee to furnish details, considering the non-compliance in previous proceedings.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 143(2), 142(1), 133(6), 69A, 69C, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish
O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.12.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2019-20.
We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 40 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication.
According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee has made cash credit of ₹.3,32,000/- and made cash withdrawal of ₹.25,96,500/- in her bank account maintained at Bank of Baroda and this information reveals that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 27.03.2023. In response to the notice, the assessee filed return of income on 29.12.2023 admitting an income of ₹.3,32,000/-. The assessee did not comply with any of the statutory notices issued under section 143(2), 142(1) of the Act or even to show- cause notice issued by the Assessing Officer as it is reflected at para 2 of the assessment order. After considering the bank statement obtained under section 133(6) of the Act, the Assessing Officer treated the cash credits at ₹.4,69,000/- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and the withdrawals of ₹.27,29,547/- as unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee and completed the assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 05.03.2024. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the 3 assessee for non-compliance to the hearing notices issued by the ld. CIT(A).
The ld. AR Shri K. Meenatchi Sundaram, C.A. filed a petition under Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 for admission of additional evidences to substantiate the grounds raised towards confirmation of additions and submits that the assessee is not much qualified and able to furnish complete details before the authorities below due to technical issues faced by the assessee while uploading the details along with supporting documents. Thus, the ld. AR prayed that the matter may be remanded to the authorities below for fresh adjudication by affording one more opportunity to the assessee.
The ld. DR Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT submits that since the assessment was completed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, the matter may be remanded to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.
Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 05.03.2024 in the absence of any explanation or documentary evidence brought on record. Before the ld. CIT(A) also, there was no compliance from the assessee. We note that there was no assistance from the assessee to the statutory notices and show-cause notice issued by the Assessing Officer as well as hearing notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). Considering the petition filed under Rule 29 of IT(AT) Rules along with various details to substantiate the claim of assessee and the submissions of the ld. DR, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee and thereafter decide the issues on merits in accordance with law after considering the submissions of the assessee as may be filed. The assessee is also directed to furnish complete details before the Assessing Officer without fail. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.