Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH, ‘A’ PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI
आदेश / ORDER
PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-12, Pune on 27-01-2021 in relation to the assessment year 2011-12. 2. Grounds challenging the initiation of re-assessment proceedings were not challenged by the ld. AR. Such grounds, therefore, stand dismissed.
The only effective issue which survives is against the confirmation of addition u/s.68 of the Act.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that notice u/s.148 was issued on 15-05-2017 regarding certain escaped income on account of unexplained cash deposits in joint bank account held with Lokmanya Multipurpose Co-operative Society Ltd. in Navi Peth Branch, Pune. The assessee filed return declaring total income at Rs.55,13,382/- in response to the notice. The assessment order was passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 determining the total income at the same returned income level but by treating the amount of cash deposited in the bank as an income u/s 68 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) affirmed the decision of the AO.
Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.
Having heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material on record, it is seen that the AO initiated re- assessment proceedings by issuing notice u/s.148 on the ground that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.1,41,01,500/- along with other two persons in their joint savings bank account. The assessee offered 1/3rd share of cash deposited in the return filed u/s.148. The AO determined the total income at the same level as was offered in the return of income. It is seen that the appeals of the other two assessees’ in this batch, namely, Saket Chakor Shah and Jyoti Chakor Shah, came up for consideration before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 31-01-2022, the Tribunal in ITA Nos.
77 & 78/PUN/2021, has accepted those assessees’ claim that once the return was filed declaring the income, the AO was not justified in ignoring that return and making similar addition of the income already offered in such return as income u/s.68 of the Act.
Both the sides are in agreement that the facts and circumstances of this appeal are similar to the cases already decided by the Tribunal. Following the same reasoning, we overturn the impugned order on this issue.
In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 05th July, 2022.