SHINY PRABHAKAR,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6(3)(1), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1636/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 July 2019AY 2014-155 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO for fresh examination, as the assessee claimed ignorance of the deposits and the provided bank account did not reflect such amounts. The AO was directed to provide details of the deposits to the assessee for her explanation.

What were the facts?

The AO added Rs. 57.11 lakhs to the assessee's income as unexplained deposits in a cooperative bank. The assessee claimed she was unaware of these deposits and only had fixed deposits of Rs. 9.75 lakhs.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 57.11 lakhs as unexplained deposits was justified without proper verification and opportunity for the assessee to explain.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B’’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI B.R BASKARAN & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri R.N Siddappaji, Addl. CIT
Hearing: 09.07.2019Pronounced: 09.07.2019

O R D E R

Per B.R Baskaran, Accountant Member

1.

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27/2/2018 passed by ld CIT(A)-6, Bangalore and it relates to asst. year 2014-15.

2.

The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of ld CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.57.11 lakhs made by the AO.

3.

We heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee is an individual and she filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.3.01 lakhs. The AO received information that the assessee has made huge deposits in a cooperative bank. Accordingly he selected the return filed by the assessee for scrutiny. Since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by him and did not offer explanations, the AO added aggregate amount of deposits of Rs.57.11 lakhs to the total income of the assessee. Before the ld CIT(A) the assessee submitted that she is maintaining a bank account with SVC Cooperative Bank Ltd., wherein she did not make deposits to the tune of Rs.57.11 lakhs as claimed by the AO. She submitted that the assessee having fixed deposits to the tune of Rs.9.75 lakhs only. She also furnished copy of bank account maintained with SVC Cooperative Bank Ltd. The ld CIT(A) took the view that the assessee should have explained as to whom the deposits belonged to. Hence, in the absence of explanations, the ld CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by ld CIT(A).

4.

The ld AR invited our attention to copy of bank account furnished in page 4 of the paper book and submitted that the assessee has made deposits of smaller amounts on various dates in SVC Cooperative bank. The aggregate amounts does not result in a figure of Rs.57.11 lakhs mentioned by the AO. He submitted that the assessee does not maintain any other account and hence she is not aware about the deposits of Rs.57.11 lakhs mentioned by the AO.

5.

On the contrary, the ld DR submitted that the assessee hass submitted a copy of bank account maintained with SVC cooperative bank Ltd. From the asst. order, it is not clear as to whether the AO is referring to the very same bank account furnished by the assessee or some other bank account. Accordingly he submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of AO for examining the issue afresh.

6. Having heard the rival contentions, we are of the view that this issue needs to be restored to the file of the AO, as the assessee claims to be not aware of deposits of Rs.56.11 lakhs mentioned by the AO and further the bank account furnished by assessee does not show such kind of deposits. Accordingly we set aside the order passed by the CIT(A) on this issue and restore the same to the file of the AO for examining it afresh. The AO is directed to furnish the details of Rs.56.11 lakhs mentioned in the asst. order to the assessee so that assessee can offer her explanations. After affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the AO may take appropriate decision in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 9th July, 2019.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →