SHIW JI SHAW,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-50(6), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 37/KOL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2022AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to verify the evidence of sales, including the cash book, to be furnished by the assessee and decide the issue afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a wholesale onion dealer, had bank deposits of Rs. 4,92,000 during the demonetization period. The assessee claimed these deposits were from cash sales of onions but failed to produce books of account or cash books before the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made on account of unexplained bank deposits is justified without proper verification of the assessee's claim of cash sales, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh verification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shiw Ji Shaw….……...................................………….………………….……Appellant 132, A.P.Devi Bazar, Titagarh, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal-700119. [PAN:BENPS7758K] vs. ITO, Ward-50(6), Kolkata……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri P.J. Bhinde, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 30, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : May 30, 2022

ORDER

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 01.12.2021 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal:

“1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.4,92,000/- made by the Assessing Officer to the income of the appellant u/s 69A read with section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. That in the face of the undisputed fact that in the wholesale trading of onion, there is a prevalence of cash sales. The Ld. CIT(A) should not have confirmed the above addition but, in fact, should have deleted the above addition of Rs.4,92,000/- as above.

2.

That the order passed by the CIT(A) is bad in law.

3. That the appellant craves leave to submit further grounds and to amend, alter or otherwise modify the grounds already taken, if necessary, before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.

2. The sole dispute raised by the assessee in this appeal is regarding confirmation of addition of Rs.4,92,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of bank deposit in the bank account of the assessee between 9.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. The plea of the Shiw Ji Shaw Assessment Year: 2017-18 assessee before the lower authorities have been that the assessee is a wholesale dealer in sale and purchase of onion. The aforesaid deposits were made out of sales of onion made by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) however observed that the assessee did not produce books of account especially the cash books either before the assessment proceedings or during the appellate proceedings.

3.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee was not asked by the lower authorities to produce cash books. The ld. Counsel has further submitted that the assessee is ready to furnish evidence of sale of onion/cash books to the Assessing Officer. He, therefore, has submitted that the matter may be remanded to the Assessing Officer for verification of the sales made by the assessee during the relevant period.

4.

The ld. DR has no objection to the above submissions of the assessee.

5.

In view of this, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer with a direction to consider the evidences furnished by the assessee including cash book and then to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →