Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹6,86,000 to the assessee's income, citing the absence of confirmations and bank statements for credit balances. The CIT upheld this addition, stating the assessee failed to prove the nature and source of the credit. The assessee presented documents to the ITAT, which were challenged by the Revenue as not being certified by lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal considered the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and found merit in the contention of the Departmental Representative. However, it was deemed essential to examine the documents submitted by the assessee for a just adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee discharged the onus to prove the nature and source of the credit balance in the balance sheet, and whether the documents submitted were sufficient to discharge this onus.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHRY
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 18/12/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–1, Chandrapur, [for short “Ld. Commissioner ”] for the assessment year 2017–18.
2 Shiv Sai Services ITA no.97/Nag./2025
In the instant case, the Assessing Officer, vide assessment order dated 30/12/2019, under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), has made the addition of ₹ 6,86,000, specifically in the absence of confirmations and bank statement from 06/02/2017 to 31/03/2017, being credit balance in the books of the assessee.
The Assessee being aggrieved, challenged the said addition before the Ld. Commissioner who affirmed the aforesaid addition by holding that the assessee though furnished the list of parties and bank statement of his bank account, where amounts have been claimed to have been received, but the assessee has neither furnished any material to show that these amounts were advanced against sale of goods nor confirmations filed from those parties. This shows that the assessee has failed to discharge the primary onus cast upon him to prove the nature and source of credit balance in the Balance Sheet.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the Assessee drew the attention of this Court towards various documents filed in the Paper Book specifically Pages–35 to 44 and claimed the ledger account of the customers clearly reflects the debit/credit entries. On the contrary, the learned Departmental Representative controverted the 3 Shiv Sai Services ITA no.97/Nag./2025 claim of the assessee by submitting that the documents filed by the assessee in the form of Paper Book, are not certified as having been filed before any of the authorities below.
Having heard the parties and perusing the material available on record and giving thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this court found force in the contention of the learned Departmental Representative, however, is of the considered view that examination of the documents submitted by way of Paper Book are essential for proper and just adjudication of the issues involved and therefore just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, this Court is inclined to remand back the matter to the file of the Ld. Commissioner, with a direction to examine said documents as in the considered opinion of this Court,
The Assessee is also directed to furnish such documents, as filed before this Court, to the file of Ld. Commissioner during the appellate proceedings. It is also clarified that onus to prove the case and/or substantiate the issue, would be upon the assessee.
4 Shiv Sai Services ITA no.97/Nag./2025
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 19.06.2025.