Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 22/09/2020 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 22/09/2020 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member): - 1. The grievance of the assessee in the aforesaid appeals for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 & 2012-13 is common. Facts are stated to be pari-materia the same in both the years. First, we take & 117/Mum/2020 M/s. Enkay Life Realtors Private Limited Assessment Years-2011-12 & 2012-13 up appeal for AY 2011-12 which contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)-24/ITO-15(1)(2)/IT- 239/2018-19 dated 23/10/2019 on following grounds of appeal: - Ground No. 1
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 24, Mumbai, ('the CIT(A)') erred in upholding the action of the Income Tax Officer - 15(1)(2), Mumbai ('the AO') in respect of the addition of Rs.10,02,500 u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act), without considering the fact that the credit from M/s Finelink Supplier Pvt. Ltd was explained.
2. The Appellant prays that the AO be directed to delete the addition of Rs.10,02,500 made. Without prejudice to the above ground, Ground No. 2
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order even when the submissions along with the paper book were submitted on the adjourned dated i.e. August 30, 2019.
2. The CIT(A) further erred in not considering the additional evidences filed.
3. The Appellant humbly prays that the matter be remanded to the AO with a direction to consider the additional evidences filed before the Hon'ble CIT(A).”
As evident the assessee is aggrieved primarily by confirmation of addition of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 for Rs.10.02 Lacs. In Ground No. 2, the assessee is aggrieved by the fact that impugned order is an ex-parte order and a plea has been raised for another opportunity to assessee to substantiate its case.
Drawing attention to Ground No.2, the Ld. Authorized Representative for assessee (AR), Ms. Hiral Sejpal, submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the additional evidences filed by the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings. The Ld. DR, Shri Amit Pratap Singh, submitted that the assessee remained negligent in attending the appellate proceedings. After due & 117/Mum/2020 M/s. Enkay Life Realtors Private Limited Assessment Years-2011-12 & 2012-13 consideration of material on record, our adjudication to the subject matter of appeal would be as given in succeeding paragraphs.
An assessment was framed against the assessee for the year under consideration u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 13/12/2018. The reassessment proceedings were triggered pursuant to receipt of certain information from investigation wing that the assessee received credit of Rs.10.02 Lacs from an entity namely M/s Finelink Suppliers Private Limited. Since the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness of the lender, the said amount was added to the income of the assessee.
Although the assessee preferred further appeal before Ld. CIT(A), however, as evident from opening para of the impugned order, the assessee failed to attend the appellate proceedings. Consequently, the action of Ld. AO in making the addition was upheld. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
Upon perusal of assessee’s submissions during appellate proceedings, we find that the assessee had filed written submissions, paper-book along with petition for additional evidences during the course of appellate proceedings. However, the same has remained to be considered by any of the lower authorities. Therefore, though the assessee remained negligent in attending appellate proceedings, however, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for re-adjudication after considering the assessee’s submissions and explanation. The assessee, in turn, is & 117/Mum/2020 M/s. Enkay Life Realtors Private Limited Assessment Years-2011-12 & 2012-13 directed to substantiate his case forthwith failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed with re-adjudication on the basis of material on record. Ground No.2 stands allowed for statistical purposes.
The appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Facts are pari-materia the same in AY 2012-13 wherein the assessee was saddled with similar addition of Rs.25.02 Lacs u/s 68. The assessee failed to appear before the appellate authorities which resulted into confirmation of the order of Ld. AO. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us with identical grounds of appeal
. Therefore, facts being pari-materia the same, the matter stands restored back to the file of Ld. AO on similar lines. The appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
8. Both the appeals stand partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 22nd September, 2020. Sd/- Sd/- (Vikas Awasthy) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) �ाियकसद� / Judicial Member लेखासद� / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांकDated : 22/09/2020 Sr.PS:-Jaisy Varghese आदेशकी�ितिलिपअ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��थ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकरआयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकरआयु�/ CIT– concerned 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड�फाईल / Guard File 6.