Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee company filed its return of income for AY 2017-18 declaring a NIL income and later a loss, which was selected for complete scrutiny. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 19,35,483/- for unexplained cash credit and Rs. 10,39,058/- for disallowance of payment made where TDS was deducted under Section 194C. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, noting the failure to submit bank statements or explain large cash withdrawals during the demonetization period. The assessee subsequently appealed to the ITAT with a delay of two days, which was condoned.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the lower authorities confirmed additions due to the assessee's lack of documentary evidence. Considering the assessee's submission of additional evidence and an undertaking that these could not be presented earlier, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The AO is directed to consider the additional evidence, and the CIT(A)'s order is set aside.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal; opportunity to furnish additional evidence; additions for unexplained cash credit and disallowance under Section 194C.
Sections Cited
143(2), 142(1), 250, 194C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ ए ” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]
ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM:
This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 26.04.2024 for AY 2017-18 .
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. 2. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 2 days for this the assessee has filed condonation petition., which are as follows-
On perusal of the condonation petition, the reason for delay in filing the appeal seems to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the condonation petition as well as judicial pronouncement that the case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay is hereby condoned.
Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee company filed its return of income for AY 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs. Nil and current year loss of Rs. 3,11,80,348/-. Return was revised on 12.12.2017 for current year loss of Rs. 3,11,80,348/-. The case was selected for compete scrutiny, notice u/s 143(2) was issued. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act and some other dates were also issued and in response to the same the assessee filed submission along with various documents like books of account audited reports, bank statement and various details time to time. After examining the submission along with balance sheet, profit and loss account the AO has made an addition of Rs. 19,35,483/- considered as unexplained cash credit. The AO has further added an amount of Rs. 10,39,058/- by making disallowance of payment made for which TDS has been deducted u/s 194C of the Act.
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. 4. Aggrieved by the said order the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on the ground that the assessee has not submitted any bank account statement to shows the large cash withdrawals and no explanation have been offered to tax as to why he had withdrawn and kept such huge amount of cash during the period prior to demonetization period.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us.
The Ld. A.R instead of arguing into merit of the case has submitted that an opportunity should be given to the assessee to place his case before the AO. The Ld. Counsel submits that the additional evidence which the assessee could not be placed before the AO are the essential piece of evidence to come into just conclusion of the case hence the assessee should be given an opportunity to place all the documents before the AO with a direction to pass an order after hearing the assessee and going over the documents.
Contrary to that the Ld. D.R supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication.
We have heard the submission of the respective parties. On perusal of the order of AO it appears to us that the assessee was show-caused and asked why the amount deposited Rs. 12,52,372/- should not be considered as unexplained cash credit but the assessee did not reply to this notice. We have also gone through the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and find that the Ld. CIT(A) has also held that the assessee did not submit his bank account statement to shows large cash withdrawals his bank book and cash book to demonstrate that he had enough cash in hand. The Ld. CIT(A) has further held that no explanation has been offered by the assessee as to why he had withdrawn and get such huge amount of cash with him during the period prior to demonetization period. Going over the aforesaid order passed by the lower authorities there is no dispute that the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) only on this ground that when the assessee did not offer or submit any documentary evidence in support of its case.
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Greenbilt Industries Ltd. 8. Before us the Ld. A.R has filed a petition and submitted that the assessee have documentary evidences which could not be submitted before the lower authorities. According to him, the documents are the essential piece of evidence for just conclusion of the case. He has also filed an Affidavit to this effect which is as follows:
Keeping in view the submission and order passed, for the interest of justice, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO for fresh consideration. The AO is directed to consider the additional evidence of the assessee and pass a afresh order. The order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside. Appeal is remitted back to the file of AO.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 24th April, 2025