MOHAN NAVEEN,CHENNAI vs. ITO,NON CORPORATE WARD 10[3], CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 339/CHNY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 June 2022AY 2017-182 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to substantiate the source of the deposit, failing which the CIT(A) could proceed based on the available material.

What were the facts?

The assessee made a cash deposit of Rs. 15.86 Lacs in a bank account. The Assessing Officer added Rs. 15 Lacs to the assessee's income under Section 69A due to the absence of a satisfactory explanation for the source of the deposit.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee provided a satisfactory explanation for the source of cash deposits made in the bank account.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI V. DURGA RAO & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आयकर अपील सं./ (िनधा1रण वष1 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Mohan Naveen ITO, बनाम/ 15A, Janakiram Nagar, 1st Main Road, Non Corporate Ward-10(3), Vs. Perampur, Chennai-600 011. Chennai. �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No. AGKPN-1494-P (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri I. Dinesh (Advocate) – Ld. AR ��थ� की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Prakash P. Kishinchandani (JCIT) – Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 22-06-2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22-06-2022 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by confirmation of certain addition of Rs.15 Lacs u/s 69A for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that requisite details were not furnished by the assessee. The Ld. AR, on the other hand, sought, another opportunity to substantiate the transactions.

2.

The impugned addition was made since it was found by Ld. AO that the assessee made cash deposit of Rs.15.86 Lacs in a bank 2 - account maintained with ICICI Bank. In the absence of satisfactory explanation forthcoming from the assessee, the amount of Rs.15 Lacs was added u/s 69A. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition in the absence of any satisfactory reply from assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

We find that the onus to establish the source of cash deposit could not be discharged by the assessee. Considering the fact that no details were submitted by the assessee during first appellate proceedings, we set aside the impugned order dated 30.03.2022 and restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate the source of deposit failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with adjudication on the basis of material on record.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 22nd June, 2022.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →