Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a Primary Agricultural Credit Society, had unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 45,10,000 during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer added this amount to the total income. The assessee claimed to have explained the source through cash sales, supported by audited books.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide adequate explanation and evidence before the lower authorities. However, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer to provide one more opportunity for the assessee to explain the source of the deposit.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was given adequate opportunity to explain the source of cash deposits, and whether the matter should be remanded for a fresh assessment.
Sections Cited
69A, 250, 44AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Muzaffarpur [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2017-18 dated 18.12.2024.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society and is established to help and empower farmers in rural areas. It works on the grassroots level Gram Panchayat and village level. It provides short term and medium-term loan to rural people to meet their financial requirements. The ld. Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.45,10,000/- to the total income of the assessee-
We have perused the material available on record and considered the facts of the case as mentioned in the Grounds of appeal. It is noted that both before the ld. Assessing Officer as well as before the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee did not make any compliance for the deposited amount of Rs.45,10,000/- during the demonetization period. The assessee had declared its total income at Rs.10,97,140/- for the assessment year 2017-18. As there was no explanation from the assessee, therefore, the amount of Rs.45,10,000/- was added by the ld. Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee under section 69A of the Income Tax Act and the total income was computed at Rs.56,07,140/- for the assessment year under consideration. Before the ld. CIT(Appeals), there was no explanation from the assessee to substantiate its grounds of appeal. The assessee has requested for another opportunity before the ld. Assessing Officer to explain the source of said deposit during the demonetization period along with a Bank certificate containing therein the description of the notes along with the date of deposit and the money received which is fully recorded in the books of account and nature and source can also be explained and the assessee is ready to provide all the details. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play and also by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Bench was of the view that the matter may be remanded to the ld. Assessing Officer for providing one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee for presenting its case before him. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set Sd/- Sd/- [Sonjoy Sarma] [Rakesh Mishra] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 04.12.2025