Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : B : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE
ORDER
PER R.K. PANDA, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15th February, 2018 of the CIT(A)-2, Noida, relating to assessment year 2009-10.
The assessee in his only effective ground of appeal has challenged the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.43,07,155/- out of addition of Rs.44,48,155/- made by the Assessing Officer.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 28th July, 2009 disclosing total income of Rs.5,76,880/-. On the basis of AIR information received that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.19,31,293/- in his savings bank account maintained with ICICI Bank, Ghaziabad, the Assessing Officer, after recording reasons, reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the IT Act and notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee on 10th March, 2016. This notice was duly served on the assessee through speed post. Thereafter, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 19th May, 2016 was issued and served upon the assessee for compliance on 27th May, 2016. Since there was no compliance, another notice u/s 142(1) along with notice u/s 143(2) both dated 21st September, 2016 were issued to the assessee fixing the hearing on 27th September, 2016. Again, there was no compliance for which the Assessing Officer issued another notice. However, the same notice also remained uncomplied with. The Assessing Officer, therefore, proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the IT Act on the ground that the assessee is deliberately avoiding the compliance to the statutory notices issued by him from time to time. From the perusal of the savings bank account maintained with ICICI Bank, Ghaziabad, the Assessing Officer noted that there are total credit entry of Rs.44,48,155/-. Since the assessee has not explained the same, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment by making addition of the said amount and determined the total income at Rs.50,25,035/-.
Before the CIT(A), the assessee filed certain additional evidences with a request to admit the same on the ground that due to the health problem of his wife, the 2
Assessing Officer. The additional evidences so produced by the assessee were forwarded by the CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer for his comments. The Assessing Officer forwarded a remand report dated 4th December, 2017. The ld.CIT(A) provided a copy of the remand report to the assessee and asked for his rejoinder which the assessee complied with. After considering the remand report of the Assessing Officer and rejoinder of the assessee to such remand report, the ld.CIT(A) reduced the amount of Rs.1,41,000/- out of the total credit entry of Rs.44,48,155/- to be explained and sustained the addition of Rs.43,07,155/- made to the total income of the assessee.
Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
We have considered the arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. A perusal of the record shows that due to persistent non-compliance of the assessee to the statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer, he completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act wherein the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.44,48,155/- being the unexplained credit entry in the bank account maintained by the assessee with ICICI Bank, Ghaziabad Branch. We find, the ld.CIT(A), after considering the three cash withdrawals of Rs.48,000/-, 48,000/- and 45,000/- on 2nd December, 2008, 13th December, 2008 and 15th December, 2008 respectively, held that an amount of Rs.1,41,000/- is available to the assessee for depositing in the bank account subsequent to 2nd December, 2008. He accordingly gave credit of this amount 3
Rs.43,07,155/-. It is the submission of the ld. counsel for the assessee that there are various credit entries in the bank account through cheques and demand drafts and the assessee has also made payment to various parties from whom goods were also purchased through cheques and, therefore, given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case before the Assessing Officer.
It is the submission of the ld. DR that despite repeated opportunities given by the Assessing Officer, the assessee never appeared before him for which the Assessing Officer had made the addition u/s 144 of the IT Act. Despite opportunities granted before the CIT(A), the assessee failed to substantiate the nature of credit entries in the bank account, therefore, the matter should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A) and the appeal filed by the assessee should be dismissed.
In our opinion, when the credit entries in the bank account are through clearing of cheques or DDs and certain payments were made again through cheques or DDs, it is obligatory on the part of the assessee to explain the nature of such credit entries before the Assessing Officer. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to explain the nature of various credit entries in the bank account and decide the issue as per fact and law. If so necessary, the Assessing Officer may summon the assessee and record his statements and also may direct him to produce the various parties from whom the assessee has received the various amounts through cheques or demand drafts which 4
were credited in the bank account. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Assessing Officer and substantiate his case without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Assessing Officer is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The ground raised by the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.