SUREKHA TUKARAM DUDHE,PANVEL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4, PANVEL, NAVI MUMBAI

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune [‘the CIT(A)’] dated 20.05.2022 for the assessment year 2015-16.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual engaged in the business of builder. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2015-16 was filed on 29.10.2015 Rs.23,02,936/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Panvel (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 18.12.2017 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at total income of Rs.52,46,960/- after making disallowance of Rs.10,69,500/- u/s 43CA, addition of Rs.15,00,000/- u/s 68 and disallowance of agricultural income of Rs.2,56,705/-. The addition u/s 43CA and u/s 68 was made by the Assessing Officer based on the revised statement of income filed during the course of assessment proceedings and the addition of agricultural income was made by the Assessing Officer for want of proof of agricultural income. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of assessment, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal by holding that when the additions were made based on the consent of the appellant, no appeal lies placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rameshchandra & Co. vs. CIT, 168 ITR 375 (Bombay) and the decision of the Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of Deep Kukreti vs. CIT, 53 taxmann.com 161 (Uttarakhand) without delving into the merits of the additions. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On perusal of the assessment order, it would be clear that the additions were made based on the revised statement furnished by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. However, before the ld. CIT(A), the appellant took a plea that the confession was made before the Assessing Officer on account of coercion exercised by the Assessing Officer, this assertion made by the appellant before the Assessing Officer was not delved upon by the ld. CIT(A) in his order. It is a settled position of law that no addition can be made by the Assessing Officer without bringing any corroborative evidence on record, merely based on the confession made by the assessee. In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the interests of justice would be met, if the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.