TEJASKUMAR SUBHASHBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(4), SURAT

Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No.339/SRT/2024 are as under:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in partly confirming the action of the Assessing Officer by sustaining the addition of Rs.38,47,170/- on account of alleged unexplained cash deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee.

It is therefore prayed that the addition made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) may please be deleted.

Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the curse of hearing of the appeal."

Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No.340/SRT/2024 are as under:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the actions of the Assessing Officer in treating the agricultural income of Rs.42,68,517/- as income from other source.

It is therefore prayed that the addition made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) may please be deleted.

Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the curse of hearing of the appeal."

First we shall take up assessee's appeal ITA No.339/SRT/2024 for AY 2015-

Brief facts of the case that assessee filed return of income on 22.08.2015 declaring total income Rs.2,02,290/- and exempt income of Rs.4,82,830/- from agriculture. In the course of assessment proceedings, assessee filed computation of total income along with balance-sheet, profit and loss account, capital account and other relevant papers were obtained and placed on record. The AO made addition for cash deposit of Rs.14,00,000/- in ICICI Bank Ltd. and Rs.29,30,000/- in Bank of Baroda aggregating to Rs.43,30,000/-. During assessment proceedings, assessee filed letter dated 25.09.2017 stated that assessee owns 15 bighas ancestral land and he is doing agricultural activities on behalf of his relatives ad measuring 114 bighas. In support assessee filed revenue records in the name of assessee and his relatives and power of attorney given by his relatives. The assessee filed revised computation of total income at Rs.18,94,712/- as agricultural income. The AO added total income of Rs.1,45,81,437/- as undisclosed sources income of assessee.

Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition made by AO and appeal was dismissed. That the assessee filed an appeal against the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 11.07.2024 before us.

During the course of argument, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted a chart of cash deposit and written submission. The Ld. AR of the assessee stated that AO made assessment u/s 144 of the Act as assessee could not comply the show cause notice issued on 27.11.2017 but in subsequent assessment year 2016-17 AO has accepted the agricultural income of Rs.36,63,924/- in scrutiny assessment passed on 17.12.2018. So the details of inquiry made during AY 2016-17 was not available before AO when he passed the assessment order under consideration. The Ld. AR prayed before us that one more opportunity may kindly be given to the assessee to explain the case before the lower authority.

On the other hand, Ld. Sr-DR for the revenue, relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record and also perused the order of Ld. CIT(A). We find that before Ld.CIT(A) appellant filed detailed submission dated 09.08.2023 and Ld.CIT(A) rejected the explanation on the ground that Power of Attorney holder but he is not entitled to receive the income. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that details of cash deposits and cash withdrawals from the bank were not submitted to him and to AO. Before us Ld. AR has given chart showing details of cash deposits claiming that the addition sustained by Ld.CIT(A) is covered by the increase in agricultural income by Rs,.14,11,882/- and balance amount was deposited out of withdrawals from bank account of Rs.24,35,288/-. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are inclined to set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and remand this matter back to the file of AO for a fresh adjudication after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

In the result, the appeal of the is allowed for statistical purposes.

Facts in brief are that assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration declaring total income of Rs.2,70,870/- and agricultural income of Rs.55,93,732/- on 02.08.2017. During the year assessee has declared profit u/s 44AD of the Act amounting to Rs.4,04,026/- on total turnover of Rs.4.44,240/- and shown bank interest of Rs.26,846/- and net agriculture income of Rs.55,93,732/- shown by assessee. The AO opined that assessee did not file the confirmations of the person from whom land was cultivated by notices issued u/s 133(6) of the Act. Aggrieved by the addition made by AO in assessment order assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Bharathi Cement Corporation (P.) Ltd. Writ Petition No.6260 of 2012. Further aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A) assessee filed present appeal before the Tribunal.

We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record carefully. Before us Ld.AR for the assessee filed written submission and prayed that one opportunity should be allowed. The Ld. DR did not object if the matter back to the file of AO with a direction that assessee should be complied and filed relevant documents as and when called for by AO. We deem it fit to give one more opportunity to the assessee to represent its case before AO for proper adjudication. Accordingly, we remand this matter back to the file of AO for a fresh adjudication after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

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

In combine result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28/11/2025. (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member सूरत / Surat Dated: 28/11/2025 Dkp Outsourcing Sr.P.S* (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) न्यायिक सदस्य/Judicial Member आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी/ The Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/ The Respondent आयकर आयुक्त / CIT विभागीय प्रतिनिधि, आयकर अपीलीय आधिकरण, सूरत/ DR, ITAT, SURAT गार्ड फाईल / Guard File //// By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, सूरत", "summary": {"facts": "The assessee filed appeals against orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for AY 2015-16 and 2017-18, which originated from assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer (AO). For AY 2015-16, the AO made an addition of Rs. 43,30,000/- for cash deposits. For AY 2017-18, the AO added Rs. 42,68,517/- as income from other sources, treating agricultural income as such.", "held": "The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) rejected the assessee's explanation for the cash deposits, stating that the Power of Attorney holder was not entitled to receive income and that details of deposits/withdrawals were not submitted. For the agricultural income, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal relying on a High Court judgment. The Tribunal decided to set aside the orders and remand the matters back to the AO for fresh adjudication, granting an opportunity to the assessee to present their case.", "result": "Allowed for statistical purposes", "sections": ["144", "143(3)", "44AD", "133(6)"], "issues": "Whether the additions made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT(A) regarding unexplained cash deposits and agricultural income are justified, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case."}} } case.