KALPANA VEERA REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD

Facts

The assessee is aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 30,99,469/- on account of unexplained cash credits in the assessee's bank account. The assessee claims to have raised a gold loan which was routed to the bank account and subsequently withdrawn as cash, which was then deposited.

Held

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had failed to consider the assessee's submissions and evidence regarding the source of cash deposits. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication with a direction to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution without properly considering the evidence regarding the source of cash deposits, and whether the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.