Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM
PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM :
This is the appeal filed by assessee against the order of CIT(A)-1, Aurangabad dated 20-03-2017 for the Assessment Year 2013-14.
Grounds raised by the assessee are extracted here as under :
“1. Addition of Rs.33,72,500/- The Ld. ITO is not justified in making addition of Rs.33,72,500/- as unexplained cash deposited in bank. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non- attendance. 2. The valid notice u/s.148 is not served on the appellant therefore the assessment order framed is bad in law. 3. The appellant may kindly be allowed to add and amend the Grounds of appeal.”
2 ITA No.1510/PUN/2017 Shri Gajanan Bandu Kanule
Brief facts of the case include that assessee is an individual.
During the year under consideration, AO noticed that assessee made
cash deposits to the extent of Rs.36,82,650/- into the Savings Account
No.5521003433 maintained with Maharashtra Gramin Bank, Shelgaon
Branch, Taluka Badnapur, Dist, Jalna. Neither assessee filed any
return of income nor presented himself before the AO during the
scrutiny assessment. Assessee did not produce any details before the
AO regarding the source of the said cash deposits. Eventually, in the
absence of any details from the assessee, the AO vide his order u/s.144
r.w.s. 147 of the Act, invoked the provisions of section 69A of the Act
and made addition of Rs.33,72,500/- as unexplained cash deposits.
In the First Appellate proceedings also, the assessee did not chose
to appear before the CIT(A) satisfactorily. The CIT(A), based on the
material available on record and relying on the judgment of Hon’ble
Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Motor General Finance Ltd. 254
ITR 449, confirmed the said addition made by the AO.
Aggrieved with the order of CIT(A), the assessee filed the present
appeal before the Tribunal with the grounds mentioned above.
Before me, Asst. of Ld. AR for the assessee appeared and
submitted that the case of the assessee was not represented before the
lower authorities. He submitted that given an opportunity, the assessee
is in a position to represent his case along with the documents
necessary for adjudication.
On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted for confirming the orders of
the AO/CIT(A) considering the assessee’s non-cooperation at the time of
assessment/appellate proceedings.
3 ITA No.1510/PUN/2017 Shri Gajanan Bandu Kanule
On perusing the facts of the case and the submissions made
before me, it is evident that the assessee failed to represent before the
AO as well as the CIT(A). Most of the additions are made, in the
absence of any explanation of the assessee, justifying the source for the
cash deposits in the bank accounts. Considering the fact that the
assessee undertakes to represent before the Revenue during the set
aside proceedings, if an opportunity is given, I felt it appropriate to
remand this issue to the file of AO for one more round of assessment
proceedings. AO is at liberty to repeat the additions in case of non-
cooperation or non-attendance by the assessee for any reasons.
Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for
statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced on this 03rd day of October, 2018.
Sd/- (D.KARUNAKARA RAO) लेखा सद� / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक Dated : 03rd October, 2018. Satish
आदेश आदेश क� आदेश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to : अ�ेिषत
अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 2. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)-1, Aurangabad 3. आयकर आयु� / The Pr.CIT-1, Aurangabad 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “SMC” / 5. DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,स आदेशानुसार
स�यािपत �ित //True Copy// Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune