GOPAL KUMAR SAH,ARARIA vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (3), PURNEA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 253/PAT/2024Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 February 2025AY 2017-18Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA "SMC" BENCH, VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKAΤΑ Before SRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Ι.Τ.Α. No.: 253/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Gopal Kumar Sah Vill. Kursakanta, Dist. Araria, Bihar-854331. (PAN: EOTPS9511F) Appellant Vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Purnea Respondent Appearances: Appellant represented by: None Respondent represented by: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 10.02.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 10.02.2025 ORDER The1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's pleas regarding the additions were not satisfactorily explained before the Assessing Officer and were upheld by the CIT(A). However, considering the nature of the issues, the Tribunal found it necessary for proper investigation at the Assessing Officer's level.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer. The additions were on account of treating sales as bogus and unexplained cash credits. The assessee claimed the cash credits were from the opening balance of the previous year.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the additions made by the AO on account of bogus sales and unexplained cash credits without proper investigation. Whether the matter needs to be restored to the AO for de novo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA “SMC” BENCH, VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA

Before: SRI SANJAY GARG

For Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR

order : 10.02.2025 ORDER The captioned appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.12.2023 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. ‘CIT(A)’] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.

2.

The assessee in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.11,31,767/- out of which an addition of Rs.5,86,849/- has been made by the lower authorities by treating the sales shown by the assessee as bogus, whereas the another addition of Rs.5,44,918/- has been made by the lower authorities on account of unexplained cash credits in the bank account of the assessee, which the assessee claimed to be out of opening balance of the earlier year.

3.

A perusal of the impugned order of the Assessing Officer reveals that the assessee could not explain the aforesaid contentions before the Assessing Officer because of which the Assessing Officer made the impugned addition.

4.

After hearing the Ld. DR, I am of the view that the matter is required to be investigated properly at the hands of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment on the above issues. The assessee will have all the rights including legal rights to raise all the grounds before the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer thereafter, decide the matter in accordance with law.

5.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →