ITO, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA vs. SUBHRANSU SEKHAR PRUSTY, NAYAGARH

1 ITA No. 482/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 13- 201 4

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 482/CTK/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-2014

Income Tax officer, Khurda Vs. Shri Subransu Sekhar Ward, Khurda Prusty, C/O. Prusty Trading co., Khandapada Road, Nayagarh. PAN/GIR No.AHHPP 9528 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Date of Hearing : 17/05/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 17 /05/ 2018

O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the

CIT(A)- 1 Bhubaneswar dated 24.8.2017 for the assessment year 2013-

14.

was called for hearing.

deleting the addition of Rs.52,56,250/- towards unexplained investment

accepting the remand report of the Assessing Officer.

2 ITA No. 482/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 13- 201 4 4. The facts in brief are that during the course of assessment

proceedings, the assessee failed to put in appearance despite giving

various opportunities. Therefore, the Assessing Officer completed the

assessment under section 144 of the Act.

deposit of Rs.1,10,35,620/- on various dates during the previous year in

Account No.911010047667785 maintained with Axis Bank, Nayagarh and

cash deposit of Rs.2,09,000/- in State Bank of India, Nayagarh, ADB

aggregating to Rs.1,12,44,620/-. As the assessee failed to appear before

the Assessing Officer to explain the cash deposits, the Assessing officer

after analysing the cash deposits and withdrawals, made an addition of

Rs.52,56,250/- as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act.

submission with numerous documents and contended that the cash

deposits in his bank accounts represented the sale proceeds of the firm

M/s. Annapurna Distributors and the major portion of the cash deposits in

the assessee’s bank accounts had been subsequently transferred to the

accounts of the firm by way of transfer. Therefore, the CIT(A) called for a

remand report from the Assessing Officer for examination and report in

compliance with Rule 46A of I.T.Rules. The Assessing Officer submitted

his report vide letter dated 4.8.2017. The copy of the remand report was

given to the assessee for his response and the assessee filed written

submission on the remand report.

3 ITA No. 482/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 13- 201 4 7. After considering the remand report of the Assessing officer and the

written submission of the assessee on the remand report, the CIT(A)

deleted the addition by observing as under:

“I have perused the facts and materials on record, the remand report submitted by the AO and also the written response of the assessee to the remand report. From the remand report, it is clear that the assessee has been able to establish that the cash deposits in his bank accounts represented cash collections from the debtors of the firm M/s. Annapurna Distributors wherein the assessee is a partner. The finding of the AO in this regard is quite clear after examination of the relevant documents and books of account of the assessee firm. The only objection of the AO is that for the amounts deposited by the assessee in the accounts of the firm, the firm has not issued any receipts since in the course of remand proceeding, no such receipts could be produced by the assessee for verification. This objection of the AO is not quite relevant and largely inconsequential. The fact as has been reported by the AO is that the cash deposits in the accounts of the assessee have come from the sale proceeds of the assessee firm. This being so, the amount of impugned deposit of Rs.52,56,250/- cannot be treated as income of the assessee. In this view of the matter, the addition of Rs.52,56,250/- is deleted.”

the CIT(A) that the only objection of the AO is that for the amounts

deposited by the assessee in the accounts of the firm, the firm has not

issued any receipts since in the course of remand proceeding, no such

receipts could be produced by the assessee for verification. This objection

of the AO is not quite relevant and largely inconsequential. The fact as

has been reported by the AO is that the cash deposits in the accounts of

the assessee have come from the sale proceeds of the assessee firm. This

being so, the amount of impugned deposit of Rs.52,56,250/- cannot be

treated as income of the assessee.

4 ITA No. 482/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 13- 201 4 9. We also find that the CIT(A) has deleted the addition after calling a

remand report from the Assessing Officer. Hence, we do not find any

infirmity in the order of the CIT(A), which is hereby confirmed and Ground

of appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced on 17/05/2018. Sd/- sd/- (Pavan Kumar Gadale) (N.S Saini) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 17 /05/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Income Tax officer, Khurda Ward, Khurda 2. Respondent. Shri Subransu Sekhar The Prusty, C/O. Prusty Trading co., Khandapada Road, Nayagarh 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaneswar BY ORDER, 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack