Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) which confirmed the AO's action of reopening the assessment. The assessee failed to submit submissions and documents regarding cash deposits before the revenue authorities.
Held
The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. The assessee was directed to submit all necessary documents.
Key Issues
Whether the reopening of assessment was valid and whether the additions and disallowances made by the lower authorities were justified, considering the assessee's failure to provide evidence.
Sections Cited
148, 143(2), 234A, 234B, 234C, 271(1)(c), 271(1)(b), 271F, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order dated 11.02.2025 relevant to the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
The order passed by lower authorities is bad in law and required to be quashed.
Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming action of AO reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act. Asst. Year : 2015-16 - 2– 3. The reopening of assessment is required to be quashed as same has been barred by limitation. 4. Both lower authorities erred in law and on facts in proceeding with assessment without issuance of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act and accordingly, order passed is required to be quashed. 5. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 3,41,570/- as unexplained investment ignoring fact that payment is through banking channel only. 6. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 32,46,000/-. 7. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 3,00,000/- as unexplained money. 8. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 17,00,000/- as unexplained investment. 9. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 1,67,400/- being stamp duty paid on purchase of property. 10. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 7,76,948/- as unexplained money. 11. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of loss of Rs. 78941/- under the head house property. 12. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 38,774/- under chapter VIA of the Act. 13. Ld. NFAC erred in confirming action of AO to treat agriculture income of Rs. 4,62,830/- as income from other sources. 14. Charging of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C are unjustified. 15. Initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c), 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act are unjustified. 3. On going through the record, we find that notices under section 250 of the Act were issued on 03.10.2024 and 28.05.2024 requesting the assessee to furnish requisite details/clarifications/explanations Asst. Year : 2015-16 - 3– regarding the source of cash deposits. In pursuance thereof, the assessee failed to submit any submissions/documents. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer, and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. We also find that the assessee even failed to submit any details/supporting evidence to prove the source of the cash deposits even before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarifications/explanations would be furnished before the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for conducting the assessment de novo. The assessee is directed to submit all relevant bank statements/submissions/documents before the Assessing Officer and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.