SRI GOURI PARAMESWARI COOPERATIVE THRIFT SOCIETY LIMITED,YELLAMANCHILI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHAPATNAM
Facts
The assessee, a co-operative society, failed to file its ROI for AY 2016-17. The AO initiated proceedings under section 147 after noticing substantial cash deposits in the assessee's bank accounts amounting to Rs. 2,52,79,048/-. The assessee filed ROI declaring a lower income, but the AO added the entire cash deposit as unexplained. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, stating the assessee did not provide sufficient evidence.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee provided documents detailing cash collections from members through agents and their deposit into bank accounts. However, the CIT(A) neither discussed the evidentiary value of these documents nor identified deficiencies. Considering a similar case for AY 2018-19 where such deposits were accepted, the Tribunal found a fresh verification necessary.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in sustaining the addition of unexplained cash deposits without properly appreciating the documentary evidence submitted by the assessee?
Sections Cited
139, 147, 148, 144B, 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam
Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA
आआआआ आआआआआआ आआआआआआ, आआआआआआआआ आआआ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam (Through Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.155/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2016-17) Sri Gouri Parameswari Co- Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ward-2(5), Visakhapatnam. operative Thrift Society Limited, Yellamanchili. PAN:AAKAS0359M (Respondent) (Appellant) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri GVN Hari, Advocate. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by:: Dr. Aparna Villuri, SR-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 24/03/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 22/04/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M.:
This appeal is filed by Sri Gouri Parameswari Co-operative Thrift Society
Limited (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre
(NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 15.02.2024 for the A.Y. 2016-17.
The assessee has raised the following grounds :
“1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case.
ITA No.155/Viz/2024 2
The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.2,52,79,048/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s.69A of the Act towards unexplained ;cash deposits in the bank accounts of appellant. 3. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.”
The brief facts of the case as culled out from the record are that, the
assessee is a co-operative society, did not file its Return of Income (“ROI”)
u/s.139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for the A.Y. 2016-17. From
the available information, the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) found that
there were substantial cash deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee,
therefore, the Ld. AO initiated proceedings u/s.147 of the Act. In response to
notice u/s.148 of the Act, the assessee filed ROI on 12.11.2021 declaring total
income at Rs.2,35,590/-. During the assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO
found that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.2,52,79,048/- in its various
bank accounts. Being not satisfied with the submission of the assessee, the Ld.
AO added the entire cash deposit of Rs.2,52,79,048/- in the hands of the
assessee and completed the assessment u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on
25.03.2022.
Aggrieved with the order of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the
Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition made by the Ld. AO, stating that
the assessee did not furnish sufficient evidences.
ITA No.155/Viz/2024 3
Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before
us. The Ld. AR submitted that, the assessee is a co-operative society and
regularly collect cash from its members through its agents and deposit the
same in its bank account. The Ld. AR invited our attention to the details of
daily collection made through its agents placed at page nos.70 to 77 of the
paper book and submitted that the assessee had filed the same before the Ld.
AO containing the details of daily collection of cash through agents and the
date-wise deposit of the collection into its bank account. The Ld. AR further
invited our attention to daily collections of cash through agents placed at page
nos.78 to 163 of the paper book and submitted that these documents could
not be filed before the Ld. AO but were filed before the Ld. CIT(A). These
documents contained the details of name of the agent, the date of collection,
the amount of collection, member from which collection has been made and
the receipt number. Inspite of all the details filed before the Ld. CIT(A), the
Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions stating that the assessee did not furnish
sufficient evidences. The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) neither
discussed about the evidentiary value of these documents nor identified any
deficiency in the documents in his order before dismissing the appeal. The Ld.
AR further submitted that, under the similar circumstances for A.Y. 2018-19,
the Ld. AO had accepted the explanation of the assessee and did not make any
ITA No.155/Viz/2024 4
addition in respect of cash deposit. Accordingly, the Ld. AR argued that the
revenue cannot take biometrically opposite stand for different year without a
material change in facts. Finally, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has
passed the order without properly appreciating the documents filed. As some
documents could not be filed before the Ld. AO, therefore, the Ld. AR prayed
before the bench to set aside the issue to the file of Ld. AO for proper
verification of the documents.
Per contra, the Learned Department Representative (“Ld. DR”)
supported the orders of revenue authority and submitted that the assessee
was given sufficient opportunity and the assessee failed to establish
genuineness of the cash deposit with concrete and verifiable evidence.
Accordingly, the Ld. DR prayed before the bench to dismiss the appeal of the
assessee.
We have heard the rival contentions and also gone through the record
in the light of the submissions made by either side. There is no dispute about
the facts that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.2,52,79,048/- in its bank
accounts during the year under consideration. The assessee claims that the
cash has been collected from its members through its agents. We have gone
through the documents placed at page nos.78 to 163 of the paper book and
found that the documents contained the name of the agent, the name of the
ITA No.155/Viz/2024 5
member from whom the contribution has been collected, the amount
collected and the date of collection. Further, we found that the Ld. CIT(A) has
not addressed or discussed the evidentiary value of these documents in his
order. There is no finding by the revenue authority on the authenticity or
completeness of the documents placed at page nos.78 to 163 of the paper
book. Therefore, we are of the view that a fresh verification is required in this
case.
7.1 Further more, we have gone through the order for A.Y. 2018-19 passed
u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 30.01.2024, wherein the Ld. AO has treated
the cash deposit of Rs.2,83,02,260/- as explained credit transactions and did
not make any addition in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, in the interest
of justice, we are of the view that, the matter requires re-examination by Ld.
AO. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue to
the file of Ld. AO with a direction to verify the documents already submitted
and any further evidence the assessee may file in support of the cash deposit.
The Ld. AO shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law after granting due
opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
ITA No.155/Viz/2024 6
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 22nd April, 2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad. Dated: 22.04.2025. * Reddy gp Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. Sri Gouri Parameswari Co-operative Thrift Society Limited, Dimili Road, Yellamanchili- 530 016 Andhra Pradesh. 2. ITO, Ward 2(5), Visakhapatnam. 3. Pr.CIT, Visakhapatnam. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad/Visakhapatnam. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER,
