Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL
आदेश / ORDER
PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT (Appeals)-1, Kolhapur on 18-07-2019 in relation to the assessment year 2005-06. 2. It is a recalled matter inasmuch as the earlier ex parte order passed by the Tribunal on 10-06-2020 was recalled vide its later order in M.A.No.10/PUN/2021 dated 05-03-2021. 3. The first ground challenging the infirmity in the mentioning of the name of the assessee in the assessment order as `Individual’ against ‘AOP’ was not pressed by the ld. AR.
The same is, therefore, dismissed.
The second ground is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.15,22,905/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) towards unexplained deposit in his Savings Bank Account.
Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the AO got information u/s.285BA that the assessee made deposits of cash in his Savings Bank Account aggregating to Rs.15.22 lakh. The assessee was called upon to explain the source of deposits. In the absence of any explanation/detail forthcoming, the AO passed order u/s.144 of the Act making addition of Rs.15,22,905/-.
Certain details were furnished before the ld. CIT(A) to support the source of deposit, which he refused to accept on the ground that the transactions made 16 years ago could not be accepted. This is how, he affirmed the addition against which the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.
After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record, it is seen that the assessee filed its appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on 03-04-2008. As against that, the impugned order was passed after more than 11 years on 18-07-2019 rejecting the assessee’s explanation about the source of deposits which could not be furnished before the AO leading to the assessment u/s.144 of the Act. It is clear that the time lapse is attributable to the ld. CIT(A), who kept the appeal pending with him for more than 11 years. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee has got full evidence to prove the source of the deposits and an opportunity be given to prove the case.
Considering the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the instant case, I am of the considered opinion that it would be in the fitness of things if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the file of AO for deciding this issue de novo. I order accordingly. Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed a reasonable opportunity of hearing in such proceedings.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 05th May, 2022.