BAGAM VIJAY KUMAR,KHAMMAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KOTHAGUDEM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1169/HYD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 January 2022AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee, given his profession and meagre income, should be provided with another opportunity to justify his claims. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the AO for de-novo consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual earning salary and tuition income, failed to reconcile ledger extracts of his accounts obtained by the Revenue from local agents. This led to an addition of Rs. 9,91,900/- by the AO and confirmation by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment was justified and whether the addition made was sustainable without providing the assessee a further opportunity to reconcile his accounts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD

Hearing: 29/11/2021Pronounced: 18/01/2022

ORDER This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-7, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0151/CIT(A)-7/2016-17, dated 28/05/2019 passed 28/05/2019 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 and U/s. 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2008-09.

2.

The assessee has raised four grounds in his appeal and they are extracted herein below for reference: “1. The order of the Appellate Commissioner is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case.

1.

2. The appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the notice issued U/s. 148 by the A.O. for reopening of the case based on the information received from the audit party.

3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the addition made amounting to Rs.9,91,900/- by the A.O.

4. Any other grounds which the appellant may urge either at or before the date of hearing.”

3.

At the outset, I find that the addition is made in the hands of the assessee because the assessee was not able to reconcile the ledger extract of his account obtained by the Revenue from the local agents as it stood in their books. The assessee failed in doing so both before the Ld.AO as well as the ld. CIT (A). I also find that the assessee is an individual earning salary income and also income from tuitions. Considering the nature of the assessee’s profession and the meagre income he earns out of the busy schedule, I am of the view that the assessee is required to be provided with one more opportunity before the Ld. AO in order to justify his claim. Accordingly, I hereby remit the matter back to the Ld. AO for de-novo consideration.

4.

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

Pronounced in the open Court on the 18th January, 2022.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →