Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal against a best judgment assessment under Section 144, raised due to cash deposits of Rs. 6,25,500 in Specified Bank Notes during demonetization, was dismissed by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) also rejected the assessee's application under Rule 46A to admit additional evidence explaining the cash deposits as business receipts.
Held
The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) with directions to admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee. The CIT(A) is to then decide the issues on merits after affording a proper and fair opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal and refusing to admit additional evidence under Rule 46A to explain cash deposits, thereby leading to a best judgment assessment under Section 144.
Sections Cited
144, 46A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PUNE
Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD
आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 05.11.2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18 which is arising out of the Order passed u/s 144 of the Act dated 16.12.2019.
Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1. National Faceless Appeals Centre (hereinafter referred to as "learned CIT(A)") erred in law and on facts in confirming the assessed income of the appellant to the tune of Rs. 19,56,388 by dismissing the appeal of the appellant.
2. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal of the appellant on technical ground Le. "non-submission of reasons for admitting additional evidence" as per Rule 46A without vising the submissions made by the appellant and merits of the case for the sake of ultimate justice.
The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal without giving any opportunity for submission of the reasons justifying admission of additional evidence or stating the intent of dismissal of appeal in any of the Notices of Hearing issued to the appellant.
4. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not setting aside the assessment order to the file of AO for fresh assessment.
5. The appellant craves / leave to add/modify/delete / amend all / any of the grounds of appeal.
3. At the outset Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) failed to admit additional evidence filed by the assessee and dismissed the appeal without dealing the issues on merit in detail and has confirmed the order of A.O. Prayer was made to direct Ld. CIT(A) to admit additional evidence and then decide the issues on merits. On the other hand Ld. DR supported the order of both the lower authorities.
I have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. Based on the information about cash deposits of Rs. 6,25,500/- in SBN denomination during demonetization period assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and even though the A.O. was having the information of the assessee being engaged in running Fertiliser Shop in the name and style of M/s ‘Arihant Krishi Seva Kendra’, Ld. AO concluded the assessment proceedings by passing the best judgement assessment.
I further observe that the assessee in order to plead against the impugned addition made application under Rule 46A of 97 Rules for admitting and filing additional evidence before Ld. CIT(A) to explain that alleged cash deposits are part of business receipts and proper details are available to explain the source. However Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the additional evidence.
I however considering the contentions of Ld. AR and in fair play deem it proper to restore the issue on merit to Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee and then decide in accordance with law after giving proper and fair opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 18th day of March, 2025.