What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) had rebutted the assessee's factual averments. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the issues back to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification and assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made to the assessee's income for unexplained bank credits and credit card reimbursements were justified, given the assessee's explanation and lack of rebuttal by the revenue authorities.

Sumit Kumar Sanei vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Q: What were the facts?

The assessee challenged additions made by the Assessing Officer and affirmed by the CIT(A) for unexplained credit entries in a bank account and reimbursement of credit card expenses. The assessee claimed the bank account belonged to a HUF and the credit card expenses were reimbursements from a company.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Sri S. S. Godara]

For Appellant: Shri M. D. Shah, Advocate

Hearing: 11/11/2019Pronounced: 15/11/2019

[Before Sri S. S. Godara, Judicial Member] आयकर अपीलसं./ (�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sumit Kr. Sanei Vs. ITO, Ward-32(2), Kolkata Gopal & Sons, Poddar Point, 113 Park Street, 1st Floor, Kolkata. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ARIPS6163R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri M. D. Shah, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख/ Date of Hearing : 11/11/2019 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 15/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) - 9, Kolkata order dated 29.03.2019 passed in case No.ITA No.771/CIT(A)-9/Wd-32(2)/2014-15/Kol involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

The assessee’s twin substantive grounds raised

in the instant appeal challenge correctness of both the lower authorities’ action adding sum total of credit entries found in alleged unexplained bank account and reimbursement of credit card expenses of Rs.5,87,223/- and Rs.1,34,320/-; respectively made in the course of assessment and affirmed in the lower appellate proceedings.

3. Both parties strongly reiterate their respective stands against and in support of the impugned additions. It transpires during the course of hearing that the assessee’s case throughout has been that the former amount involved bank account of the eponymous (HUF) than himself and the latter sum represented reimbursements from M/s G.S. Fertilizer (P) Ltd. and therefore the impugned additions have been wrongly made in his hands. Learned senior departmental Representative fails to dispute the clinching fact that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) has rebutted the clinching factual averments in assessment and lower appellate proceedings. I conclude in this factual background that these twin issues require factual verification at the Assessing Officer’s ends. I accordingly remand the issue back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment as per law within three effective opportunities of hearing.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 15.11.2019.

SUMIT KUMAR SANEI,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-32(2), KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments