Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.315/Ran/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-2013
Sri Tarun Sachdev, Om Vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Jamshedpur Tower, SB Shop Area, Bistupur, Jamshedpur PAN/GIR No. Aiops 7739 l (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
Assessee by: Shri S.k.Poddar/Devesh Poddar, Adv Revenue by : Shri A.K.Mohanty, JCIT
Date of Hearing : 22/05/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 23 /05/ 2018 O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A),
Jamshedpur, dated 16.9.2016, for the assessment year 2012-2013.
Ground No.1 of appeal reads as under:
“For that the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming a disallowance of Rs.2,63,393/- out of interest expenses claimed. The CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO failed to consider that loan was not utilised for personal purposes, as such, disallowance made by the AO to the extent of 38% of the expenses claimed is unjustified, illegal and arbitrary.”
2 IT A No.3 15/R an/2 016 Asse ssmen t Year: 2 012 -20 13
As this ground was not pressed before the CIT(A), therefore, there can
be no grievance caused to the assessee against the order of the CIT(A).
Hence, these grounds of appeal are dismissed.
Ground Nos.2 & 3 of appeal read as under:
‘3. For that the CIT(A) was not justified in making an addition of Rs.26,30,527/- on the ground that the deposits made in the bank account remains unexplained. All the deposits were explained in detail before the AO as well as before the CIT(A). The addition made while rejecting the submission of the appellant in a summary manner is unjustified, illegal and incorrect. 4. For that the appellant submitted details of the bank account, cash flow summary and confirmation from the partnership firm regarding withdrawal of funds from them. The detail of the gold loan and deposit made thereof in the bank account was also explained. There was no deposit which was not explained. As such, the addition made is unjustified, illegal and incorrect.”
The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer found that the
assessee had following bank accounts:
The Federal bank A/c. No.11970100088807
Axis Bank A.c No.005010100677011
Indusind bank A/c No.0068-H00037-001
Indusind Bank A/c No.0068-H01747-050
The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has made cash
deposit of Rs.26,30,527/- in the above bank accounts. The assessee was
3 IT A No.3 15/R an/2 016 Asse ssmen t Year: 2 012 -20 13
asked to explain the source of the same. The assessee filed cash flow
statement and submitted that the cash deposit in the bank account was out
of withdrawals of own funds from the bank. Since the assessee did not file
relevant details and documents in support of his contention, the Assessing
Officer held the cash deposit of Rs.26,30,527/- as unexplained deposits in
the bank and added the same to the income of the assessee.
On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer.
Before us, the only argument of ld A.R. of the assessee is that the
assessee has all the relevant details and documents in support of the cash
deposits in the bank amounting to Rs.26,30,527/- and, therefore, in the
interest of justice, one more opportunity should be granted to the assessee
to produce the relevant details and documents before the CIT(A) in support
of the cash deposits in the bank.
Ld D.R. did not have any objection to the submission of ld A.R. of the
assessee.
In the given facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the
orders of lower authorities and remand the matter back to the file of the
CIT(A) for adjudicating the issue afresh after considering the relevant details
and documents to be filed by the assessee in support of the cash deposits in
the bank accounts. Needless to mention that he shall allow reasonable
4 IT A No.3 15/R an/2 016 Asse ssmen t Year: 2 012 -20 13
opportunity of hearing to the assessee before adjudicating the issue afresh.
Thus, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for
statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23 /05/2018 Sd/- sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (N.S Saini) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ranchi; Dated 23 /05 /2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Sri Tarun Sachdev, Om Tower, SB Shop Area, Bistupur, Jamshedpur 2. The respondent: ITO, Ward 1(1), Jamshedpur 3. The CIT(A), Jamshedpur 4. Pr. CIT, Jamshedpur 5. DR, ITAT, Ranchi BY ORDER, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PS, ITAT, CAMP AT RANCHI