What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal could not adjudicate the issue completely as the outcome of the substantive addition in the hands of the husband was not known. Therefore, the matter was set aside and remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order upholding an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit. The addition was made on a protective basis in the hands of the assessee and substantively in the hands of her husband.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of unexplained cash credit made on a protective basis can be adjudicated without knowing the outcome of the substantive addition in the hands of the husband.

Suman Agrawal, Dhanbad vs ITO | ITAT Ranchi 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI ‘ SMC’ BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI N.S SAINI

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv

For Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT

Hearing: 22/11

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI ‘ SMC’ BENCH, RANCHI

BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.307/Ran/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-2009

Suman Agarwal, 313, Shri Vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Dhanbad Ram Plaza, Bank More, Dhanbad PAN/GIR No.AFEPA 0950 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv Revenue by : Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT

Date of Hearing : 22/11/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 22 /11/ 2018

O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of

the CIT(A), Dhanbad dated 21.9.2017 for the assessment year

2008-09.

The sole issue involved in this appeal is that the CIT(A) erred

in upholding the addition of Rs.10,00,000/- as unexplained cash

credit.

Notice of hearing was sent to the assesse by Regd.Post and

none appeared when the case was called for hearing. The Bench

was of the view that the appeal can be disposed of in absence of

P a g e 1 | 3

ITA No. 307/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 08- 09 :

the assesse and, therefore, disposed of the appeal after considering

the arguments of ld D.R. and materials available on record.

Ld D.R. supported the orders of lower authorities.

I have considered the submission of the D.R, perused the

orders of lower authorities and materials available on record. In

the instant case, the addition of Rs.10,00,000/- was made by the

Assessing Officer as unexplained cash credit on protective basis in

the hands of the assesse Smt. Suman Agarwal and also on

substantive in the hands of her husband Shri Sanjay Kumar

Agarwal. The CIT(A) has confirmed the addition made by the

Assessing Officer on protective basis in hands of Smt. Suman

Agarwal.

During the course of hearing, ld D.R. could not inform the

Bench as to what happened in the hands of Shri Sanjay Kr. Agarwal.

In my considered view, where the additions are made made on

protective and substantive basis, the appeals have to be decided

together. Ld D.R. has failed to inform me as to what happened in

the case of Shri Sanjay Kr Agarwal, husband of the assesse and,

therefore, I am unable to adjudicate the issue completely.

Therefore, I set aside the orders of lower authorities and remit the

matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal afresh

P a g e 2 | 3

ITA No. 307/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 08- 09 :

after obtaining the information as to what happened in the hands

of the husband of the assesse Shri Sanjay Kr Agarwal. With these

directions, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical

purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Order pronounced on 22/11/2018. Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ranchi; Dated 22/11/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Suman Agarwal, 313, Shri Ram Plaza, Bank More, Dhanbad

The Respondent. ITO, Ward 2(2), Dhanbad 3. The CIT(A)- Dhanbad 4. Pr.CIT- Dhanbad 5. DR, ITAT, Ranchi 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order

Sr. Pvt.Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi on tour

P a g e 3 | 3

SUMAN AGRAWAL,DHANBAD vs. ITO WARD-2(2), DHANBAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments