RAM BHAJAN GURJAR,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. ITO, WD-1, SAWAIMADHOPUR

PDF

ITA 1020/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 September 2025AY 2013-2014Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1020/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2013-14 | Ram Bhajan Gurjar | Village-Bhedola, Tehsil-Chouth Ka | Barwara, Swai Madhopur. | स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AUFPG8836P | अपीलार्थी / Appellant | बनाम | The ITO, | Ward-1, | Sawai Madhopur. | प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Anoop Bhatia, CA; राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue by: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR. सुनवाई की 3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The assessee-appellant is aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) which upheld the assessment order and two additions made by the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2013-14. The appellant claimed that cash deposits in his bank account were for performing a Mahayagya, with donations as the source.

Held

The Tribunal noted that the additional documents submitted by the assessee were not verified by the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after verification of the documents and allowing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Key Issues

Whether the additional evidence submitted by the assessee can be admitted at the appellate stage, and if so, whether it requires verification by the Assessing Officer.

Sections Cited

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee-appellant has preferred this appeal, feeling dissatisfied with the order dated 30.06.2025, passed by Learned CIT(A), relating to the assessment year 2013-14, whereby his appeal challenging the assessment order dated 06.12.2018, has been dismissed, and the two additions, made by the Assessing Officer have been upheld.

Arguments heard. File perused. dated 16.07.2025 under the signature of Authorized Representative of the appellant, with the prayer that revised grounds of appeal may be taken on record.

As alleged therein, certain clerical errors crept in the grounds of appeal which findmention in para 10 of Form 36.

Ld. AR for the appellant has not been able to explain before us as to why this application came to be filed, and as to which errors had crept in the grounds of appeal.

So, we proceed to dispose of the appeal on the grounds of appeal put forth in Form No.36.

4. Today, Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted an application to place on record copies of certain documents, including two affidavits in support of the claim of the appellant regarding cash deposits in his bank account. Ld. AR admits that said affidavits were not submitted before the authorities below.

Ld. AR for the appellant has also submitted copies of some other documents stating that the same are also relevant for adjudication of the issues involved.

As regards the issue of cash deposits by the appellant, claim of the appellant is that same was deposited to perform a Mahayagya. donations were the source.

In this regard, Learned AR for the appellant has drawn our attention to the Paper book submitted alongwith the above-mentioned application seeking permission to produce the same, while presenting that additional evidence could not be earlier submitted.

All relevant documents were required to be produced before the Assessing Officer. We have seen the documents sought to be filed at this stage. Without verification, these cannot be relied on. So, these would require verification by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the matter needs to be restored to the files of Assessing Officer for effective adjudication of the issue, on which additional documents are sought to be filed by the appellant.