Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SMT. BEENA PILLAI
Date of Hearing : 18-11-2020 Date of Pronouncement : 19-11-2020 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 20/08/2019 passed by Ld. ACIT (A)-4, Bangalore for assessment year 2014-15 on following grounds of appeal: “1. CIT Appeal's order is opposed to the law and facts of the case.
2. Appellant submitted details of deposit and the sources for such deposit. CIT(A) failed to examine the same.
3. CIT (A) has not given finding on the submission of details of depcit and sources.
4. CIT(A) on surmise accepted the finding of Assessing officer
Appellant craves to add or delete any grounds of appeal
at the time hearing.
6. Hon'ble ITAT may kindly allow the appeal and render justice to the appeal.” Brief facts of the case are as under:
2. Assessee is an individual and filed his return of income for year under consideration on 01/10/2014 declaring total income of Rs.13,89,340/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notice under section 143(2) was issued to assessee. Notice under section 142(1) of the Act was also issued to assessee in response to which representative of assessee appeared before Ld.AO and filed requisite details as called for.
3. During the assessment proceedings it was from AIR information available with revenue, Ld.AO noted that assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.43,93,000/- in Corporation bank and Rs.17,06,000/-in IndusInd bank Ltd. Assessee was a accordingly called upon to explain the nature and source of cash deposits made in these banks and was requested to furnish copy of the bank accounts. On verification of the bank statements, Ld.AO noted that assessee failed to explain the nature and sources of the deposits. He therefore made addition of cash deposits amounting to Rs.60,99,000/- under section 68 of the act as unexplained cash credits.
4. Aggrieved by order of Ld.AO, assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A).
5. Before Ld.CIT(A) assessee filed statement deposits and withdrawals prepared by him and submitted that these were from genuine sources. Ld.CIT(A) observed that assessee neither produced any credible proof nor appeared before the authority in support of his submissions. Ld.CIT(A) thus concluded that nothing substantial documents/evidences are available with assessee to support the claim. He accordingly upheld the addition made by Ld.AO.
Aggrieved by order of Ld.CIT (A) assessee is in appeal before us now.
We note that assessee has not filed any documentary evidences in order to discharge his burden under section 68 by establishing, source, genuineness, creditworthiness of the cash credits in the bank accounts of assessee. Nothing has been placed on record to establish the same by assessee before authorities below. However in the interest of Justice we feel that one more opportunity must be granted to assessee in order to establish the 3 ingredients necessary for burden of proof to be discharged by assessee under section 68 of the act.
We therefore remand this issue to Ld.AO to consider the claim of fresh. Assessee is directed to file/produce persons in order to discharge his burden under section 68 of the act by establishing all the 3 necessary ingredients being the source, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness. Ld.AO shall then verify the details/evidences filed by assessee in accordance with law.
Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. Accordingly grounds raised
by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th Nov, 2020 Sd/- Sd/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 19th Nov, 2020. /Vms/ Copy to: